The latest conflict between American citizens and their out-of-control, unconstitutional, oppressive government is currently taking place in Oregon.

To briefly recap the situation, Dwight and Steven Hammond are ranchers, father and son, in Burns, Oregon. They were convicted of arson for starting fires on public land adjacent to their own land. They served relatively short sentences for the offenses, sentences that were short of five-year minimum sentencing guidelines because U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan believed five years was ” a sentence which would shock the conscience.” After they served their time and were released, the government decided the Hammonds must serve that minimum sentence, and were ordered to return to prison.

Militiamen, including Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne, have come to the aid of the Hammonds, considering this another example of oppression and harassment from the federal government, and have essentially taken over a wildlife refuge in the area, forming a de facto standoff with authorities. However, the Hammonds have made it clear they do not want the assistance of Bundy or any of the militia, and have turned themselves in to serve the remainder of their sentences.

That is the situation as it currently stands.

While I am as angry about the usurpations of our rogue federal government as the next patriot, we must be very careful about exceeding the bounds of morality and lawful action. While it is tempting to jump on the bandwagon and support the actions of a number of people in this Oregon situation, is this a situation that freedom-loving Americans should really be supporting?

According to the reports I’ve read, these individuals did in fact break the law. They set fires on federal land, which constitutes arson. They did not have permission to set these fires, and in at least one case, did so during a county-wide burn ban (often implemented in dry areas to prevent wildfires). It is completely within the realm of possibility that their actions could have caused serious damage and endangered human life, especially if the fires got away from them. In one case, it is reported that firefighters were camped up a butte from the place where they started the fire. While it may be that the sentences imposed as punishment for setting these fires was excessive, the fact remains that these two men committed a crime. Though the sentence may be excessive, the law is that we are not allowed to set fires on property we do not own, and we are not allowed to endanger the property and lives of others, and the law states what the minimum sentencing requirements are for certain crimes. Minimum sentencing is an unfortunate but necessary thing because of judges who have been too soft on dangerous criminals in the past.

While we may disagree with the sentence, we cannot rightfully disagree with the fact that the law was broken, and that the law requires this minimum sentence. The proper remedy therefore for lawful and responsible citizens is to seek remedy through the legislative process. In other words, this means we should seek through our lawmaking bodies to reduce the sentence for such crimes under mitigating circumstances so that they are more befitting the gravity of the crime which was actually committed.

It is particularly telling and worthy of heavy consideration that the two men who have been ordered to report back to jail to serve more time have rejected the offer of support from the militiamen and other supporters. If the Hammonds really felt there was an injustice being perpetrated against them, it stands to reason that they would have welcomed the assistance of the Bundys and other supportive citizens. Yet they said that they did not want this support, and were willing to report to jail to serve the remainder of their sentence as required by law.

It is important to note, too, that many other militia groups have taken a hands-off position to this “occupation” and have distanced themselves from the Bundy’s actions. Why would they do this if it was clear that “the cause was just”?

If you want to make a case that the federal government owns and has control of way too much land in the various states, especially out West, that’s a mighty good case, and I’m with you there.

If you want to make a case that the minimum sentence for the crime committed is excessive, that’s another good case, and based on the available information, I’m with you there, too.

If you want to make a case that it’s “sloppy justice” and unfair to release the Hammonds after having served their imposed sentence, only to order them back for more incarceration, I’m with you there, too.

But the fact remains that they committed illegal acts and broke the law. This is not the hill for patriots to die on.

As I have stated several times before, good people have duty to disobey unjust laws. Unjust laws are contrary to the U.S. Constitution, and especially to the Natural Law upon which the United States was founded. For good people to acquiesce to unjust laws is for society to surrender to evil, which should never be allowed to happen. It has happened too many times in the past, including the most infamous example of Nazi Germany.

If there was truly a recent incident that might be deserving of the armed defense of citizens of another citizen who was being railroaded, that situation would probably be Kim Davis of Kentucky. You may recall that this county clerk was sent to jail for upholding the laws of Kentucky and the United States Constitution, after the U.S. Supreme Court illegitimately attacked the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution in attempting to redefine marriage and impose it on all the states. It doesn’t get much worse than being sent to jail for upholding the law, your state constitution, and the Constitution of the United States. So when we consider the case of the Hammonds in Oregon, versus the defense of Kim Davis who was jailed for upholding the law and the constitutions of her state and her nation, it should be very clear that any armed defense of a citizen under attack from its own oppressive government should have gone to Kim Davis. What was done to her would have incensed the founders of this nation, had they lived to see it

We must also consider the situations that have occurred in places like Ferguson, Missouri and other places around the country (Trayvon Martin sympathizers, “Black Lives Matter,” etc.). Yes, all rational and freedom-loving American citizens recognize that lawless behavior has reigned in America in recent years, with these riots and violent gatherings constituting an attack on the laws of our nation and the safety of our fellow citizens. We must take every precaution so that we do not, in our zeal to protect the American way of life, inadvertently become lawless individuals like those in Ferguson and other places. In fact, we must avoid every hint of such a thing.

Our current Marxist, anti-American president and his Alinskyite minions have been very eager for the past seven years and longer to create chaos in the United States. Most conservatives have by this point heard of the Cloward-Piven strategy to wreak havoc on our society, making it easier or oppressive authoritarians to extinguish the American way of liberty. We must be very careful not to do their work for them, or even assist them in their efforts.

The time may come for freedom-loving Americans to take up arms against their own government if that government becomes destructive of the ends for which it was created. Indeed, this country was founded under such circumstances when John Adams, Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and all the rest took up arms against their own government–a government which was denying them their God-given rights and trampling their liberties.

But before we reach that point, before we plunge headlong into armed conflict, we must make absolutely and completely certain of the rightness of our cause. You may recall that the American Revolution was several years in coming, and even when it arrived, the founder’s debated it extensively before they decided to take up arms. They also took the time to articulate clearly what has been done wrong to them, and exactly why they were taking the actions that that they took in 1776. It could easily be argued that the American people have put up with more abuses from their government today than the founders did from the British government in 1776. Nevertheless, it remains the responsibility of responsible citizens to ensure that they are on firm moral and legal ground before taking drastic actions that will likely result in bloodshed.

A handful of fed-up patriots cannot bring about the fundamental return to traditional American values that will be needed to save this great country. It will require the understanding and support of the public in general. Patriots can’t win that support if they stand on the mushy ground of a case involving people who broke reasonable, just law designed to protect the lives and property of other Americans. That they may have been punished excessively isn’t enough justification to get the public on board with fighting an overbearing federal government; the justification must stand on firm moral high ground.

Have our liberties been trampled by our own government? Yes. Should we do something about it? Most assuredly. But we retain the lawful tools to do so without armed conflict, if we will only use them. Yes, most of our so-called representatives are worthless. But whose fault is that? It is ours for electing them, and allowing them to be elected. We must first seek legislative remedy, to correct unjust laws, actions and sentencing from our government. If current leaders are unwilling to do this, we must replace them at the ballot box. Thankfully, we still possess that option. Does the proliferation of Leftist propaganda and widespread ignorance of the American people make that extremely difficult? Without a doubt, but then, when was the way of liberty ever easy?

Only if the people are trampled with no legal recourse to fix their own government are we justified in taking up arms. It was the last resort for the American founders some 240 years ago, and it is our last resort today.

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.



