Peers doesn't mean people like us that think like us. It means a jury selected from a cross section of society. Normal people not from the justice system.
Montana's Constitution simply states a right to a trial by jury. The 6th Amendment to the US Constitution states:
In federal cases there is a constitutional requirement to be impartial, not to be a "peer", whatever that means.
Are we to ignore the requirements of the Constitution because we don't like the law, a law whose authority eminates from that same Constitution?
And when the cross section of society thinks like the defendant, what then?
Let's say for sake of discussion, some guy accosts you and your family at a WalMart somewhere (or a Kroger if you hate WalMart). He just walks up and, before you can stop him, he executes your wife and one of your children in cold blood because you weren't quick enough on the draw. Then, when he sees you pull your own gun, he drops his gun, says "please don't kill me" and gets to his knees.
If you shot him in the head I would vote to acquit on the murder charges. You really want to be convicted and possibly go to your death for that? That's what the law says should happen. You should go to your fate and leave your remaining children without a father. Sorry, I'll vote to acquit regardless of the evidence at hand demonstrating your guilt for murdering the guy in cold blood.
I'll do what I think is right.