Molon Labe! (73 page)

The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States
[government]
;...

— Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution

Fully one-third of America's land mass is being policed by the feds as if such were
"the territory or other property belonging to the United States"
government under Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution. We're talking 28% of Montana, 49% of Wyoming, 50% of California, 63% of Idaho, 68% of Utah, and 87% of Nevada!

However, for the USG to regulate the use or disposal of property, the USG must be the
owner
of that property. It does not own the West.

IV:3:2 of the Constitution refers to
"territory,"
which is what the West was before statehood. Formerly owned by Great Britain, the
"Western territory"
was ceded to the Union after the Revolutionary War and was under the jurisdiction of the USG until western statehood. (See
The Federalist
#7 and #43.) Also under US jurisdiction after the War was the
"district of Vermont"
which was recognized as an independent republic (as were Texas and Hawaii) until becoming the 14th state in 1791.

The
"Western territory"
was carved up into singular territories in the 1860's. Idaho was a
"territory"
from 1863 until 1890. Montana was a
"territory"
from 1864 until 1889. Wyoming was a
"territory"
from 1868 until 1890. Arizona was a
"territory"
until 1912. When a
"territory"
becomes a state, it is no longer under the federal jurisdiction of IV:3:2. Once the western territories became states, all that land previously controlled by the feds should have legally gone to the states. The fact that the USG does not abide by this was the basis for several lawsuits by both individuals and states (
e.g.,
U.S. v. Haught
in federal district court in Phoenix). The original 13 colonies got to
keep
their land when they became states, and under the "equal footing" doctrine so should the rest of the states.

If a state, by consent of its legislature, wishes to sell some of its land to the USG, it may — and that federal property is then under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress under I:8:17 of the Constitution. But unless and until a state sells land to the USG, it still belongs to the state.

So, there are only two ways the feds may lawfully exercise criminal jurisdiction over USA property:
1)
If it is part of a US territory or protectorate (before becoming a state), or
2)
if it is property sold by a state to the USG. Look at IV:3:2 this way: chronologically in between
"territory"
and
"property"
is one of the 50 states. Forcing the USG to recognize this without resorting to arms is the present and future dilemma of the American West.

The people of the West are being pushed to the limit. The surprise is not that they are finally talking about taking up arms to defend their way of life...but that they have waited so long.

— Vin Suprynowicz,
The Ballad of Carl Drega
(2002), p. 138

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight; nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety; is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

— John Stuart Mill

Casper, Wyoming

Fall 2019

"Grampa Bill, I heard on TV that our refusal to turn in our battle rifles is Whiskey Rebellion 2 — that our actions deserve federal intervention."

...It is remarkable how little changed in the nature of conflict and the parameters of political discourse during three decades of Revolutionary upheaval
(
i.e.
, between 1765 and 1795)
. There is little of substance to distinguish the rhetoric, perspectives, ideology, or methods of Tories and British bureaucrats in the earlier period from those of the friends of
[federal government]
order thirty years later. There is an ideological identity between many of the suspicions, fears, diagnoses, and prescriptions for the cure of political ill-health in the writings of Thomas Hutchinson, James Otis, George Grenville, and Lord North in the years preceding the Revolution, and those of George Washington, Hamilton, Fisher Ames, and other Federalists after the war.

— Thomas P. Slaughter,
The Whiskey Rebellion
(1986)

In 1790, Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton urged a federal excise tax on the domestic production of spirits. The grain farmers in western Pennsylvania, a rough and independent lot, didn't much care for this. It hurt their livelihood, and the feds had been little help in stopping the Indian raids. Being on the frontier of the new nation and far from reach of the young federal government, the whiskey-making farmers not only refused to pay the excise tax, they began to assault federal tax collectors who unwisely strayed too far from Philadelphia (the US capital at the time). Then, they coerced federal judges not to preside over excise tax cases. By August 1794, unrest had spread to twenty counties in four states.

Increasingly concerned, Washington and Hamilton decided that it was time for action. They formed a 12,950 man army, marched into western Pennsylvania and quelled the rebellion (although the leaders escaped into the mountains). Their supply line stretched to breaking, Hamilton authorized the impressment of civilian property. Crops and livestock were stolen, and fences were torn down for firewood.

1,500 soldiers under General Daniel Morgan (the famed guerrilla leader who so brilliantly harassed the British during the Revolutionary War) were left behind in Pittsburgh to maintain order until the spring of 1795. They frequently looted and destroyed private property, and roughed up civilians. Through this terror the federal government amply demonstrated its authority and quelled the tax revolt.

Bill Russell, now eighty-one years old, says, "Similar events, but different."

"How so?" asks the sixteen year-old.

"The Whiskey Rebellion of 1794 was basically a regional tax revolt. Our situation involves much, much more than that. The federal government is making noises of a military invasion to conquer a peaceful state which refuses to self-disarm in obedience to the
Stanley
ruling and the resulting
Dangerous Weapons Act
of 2007 and
Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act
. In order to disarm us of the most effective hand weapon ever created — the self-loading battle rifle — Washington, D.C. blithely proposes genocide under the guise of Civil War 2."

"But they promise not to confiscate handguns and hunting long guns. All we have to do is give up our AR15s, AKs, M1s, M14s, and FALs."

Russell chuckles. "Yeah, while they keep
theirs,
and more. It's like promising to leave an animal alone after he's been declawed. Oh, but he's allowed to keep his teeth? It's his very claws which keep him safe from predators. To assent to his declawing is suicide. Animals know this and won't permit it. You're forgetting that we've already given up our BARs, M2s, and M16s because of the
National Firearms Act of 1934
. Only time will tell if Wyomingites and Westerners have the survival sense of the average critter."

"What should we do?"

"Our choice is simple: Should we fight
with
our battle rifles, or without them? Do we have a better chance of freedom with them, or without them? Let me put it this way: my elk rifle doesn't protect my elk rifle; my
FAL
protects my elk rifle. Firearms are tools — specific tools for specific tasks. Can liberty be protected solely by hunting weapons? That would be like building a house with a Leatherman multitool — theoretically possible, but very arduous, and therefore never attempted."

"But doesn't our keeping battle rifles invite federal response?"

"No, not at all. There's a faulty hidden premise there."

"Which is what, Grampa?"

"That if self-loading, magazine-fed rifles had not been invented, we would be safe from unilateral disarmament."

"I don't understand."

"Okay. Imagine it's 1919 instead of 2019, and only bolt-action rifles exist. They were the battle rifles of their day. What tyrannical government of 1919 allowed their civilian possession? None. First, they registered and confiscated the Mauser M98 and Lee-Enfield, and then they worked their way through the hunting rifles and shotguns. We're seeing the same progression today, only the feds had to start much later because until 1934 we enjoyed unrestricted ownership of cannons, mortars, and machine guns — and all, somehow, without a crime wave.

"No, the government cannot allow its subjects to be as well armed as their enforcers. That's straight out of Tyranny 101. As Chairman Mao used to say, 'All political power comes from the barrel of a gun.' An armed citizenry means a
balance
of political power
vis-a-vis
the federal government. That was the entire
point
of the 2nd Amendment, which was fully explained in
The Federalist
. The whole purpose of our disarmament is the creation of an unchallengeable police state.

"So, no, my FAL is not a red cape to the federal bull.
Any
gun is. Congress is harping on military-pattern rifles only because they're the most effective remaining firearms at keeping tyranny in check, so it's logical strategy to confiscate them before hunting rifles."

Grandson grins. "So we're not gonna disarm, right?"

Russell lovingly places a weathered hand on the young man's shoulder. "I wouldn't bet on it, Son. I wouldn't bet on it."

"Good! They'd come after your FAL that Mr. Krassny used to own."

"That'd be some trophy, wouldn't it? After all the trouble he stirred up for them!" Russell says. "Hey, have I shown it to you lately? I just had some new optics mounted. Can't use the iron sights anymore with my old eyes."

"Awesome! Can we go out back and shoot it?"

"Sure thing, Son. You know what you have to do, right?"

Grandson intones, "Load mags, pick up brass, and clean the rifle after."

Russell smiles. "You got it. What a deal, eh? Oh, and I'll bring along something you've never seen."

"What's that?"

"Harold Krassny's war-issue Colt .45."

"
No!
"

"Indeed. When his P-51 got shot down over Occupied Europe, he killed three Germans with it getting back to Allied lines. He gave it to me just before he died back in 2008. Now, I want
you
to have them."

"
No way!
"

Russell laughs. "Yep, you. I'd have given them to your father, but we both know he wouldn't appreciate them. He thinks Harold was a cold-blooded murderer responsible by example for over 200 deaths. Carl never understood what it takes to maintain our liberty, but you
do
. So, I want
you
to have the FAL and the Colt, but only if you promise me something."

Grandson is instantly solemn. "Yes, sir, anything."

With great severity Russell says, "These are not just pieces of steel. They're not even just guns. They are sacred relics, son. They were owned by a true American patriot who fought and died for his country. You must promise me right here and now that you will
never
, under any circumstances, surrender them to some gun confiscation squad. Not out of fear, not out of weakness, not out of despair will you ever give them up and dishonor your grandfather and Mr. Krassny. And when you can no longer bear them because of age or infirmity, you will choose a worthy successor. Promise me."

The young man sniffs and rapidly blinks his tears away. "I promise, Grampa. I'll never give them up. They'd have to kill me first."

It's now Bill Russell's turn to blink away the tears.

A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

— Edward Abbey

Wyoming news

Fall 2019

The Wyoming State Shooting Association (WSSA), a pro-freedom gun organization which sponsors many excellent competitive events, reaches 10,000 members — an historic first. With the help of the WSSA, the state now enjoys nearly as many annual shooting competitions as Switzerland.

The Fuel Cell Energy Corporation, which has led the way for hydrogen production from coal, opens a strip mine in the Powder River Basin of Campbell County. The famous coal seam is enormous: 100' thick, 5 miles wide, and 50+ miles long — fueling the world for 200 years. Early successful reclamations of strip mines have calmed much of the original concern, though residual (rather unfounded) environmental hysteria remains.

Sergeant First Class Michael Poole of Camp Guernsey demonstrates incomparable style and decorum when he asks Governor Preston for his daughter's hand in marriage. James and Juliette both adore the clean-cut NCO, who wants someday to manage the Preston ranch and have many children with Hanna (who also dreams of a large family).