Columnists

Principles of Freedom – The Oregon Standoff

Issue 4.16

A lot of people have been commenting on the conflict in Oregon between government officials and a rancher. On some levels this seems a lot like the recent conflict in Nevada. However, there are some very specific differences that should be taken into account when considering what side should receive support and which should not.

As is usually the case in conflicts there are problems on both sides. Does the rancher have a leg to stand on with what he believes are his rights to continue to work the land he is on? I believe he does. I am firmly with those that are convinced that the Federal Government has no right to control lands or dictate to the states how or by whom those lands can be used. The Constitution is pretty clear on this – the Federal Government does not own land except for the 10 Square miles in Washington D.C. for the seat of government. They also control lands in the various states that are used as forts, armories, etc. There is no provision for them arrogating state lands unto themselves whether it be for the Bureau of Land Management, National Parks, National Forests, etc. These are Constitutionally the realm of states and their legislatures and cannot legally be created by edict from Presidents or the National Congress.

Now we come to where the two situations diverge. In the Bundy case in Nevada, the family and their supporters stayed on their land which they have a lease to and which they were using and improving since before the BLM existed. The government correctly backed down before things got out of hand. Actual militia people from Nevada (militias can only legally operate in the state they are citizens of or under the direction of their governor if outside state borders) stood guard around the farmhouse and family. Others calling themselves militias came to the area and made a lot of noise and were visible, but the real militia quietly went about protecting the family and their rights.

In the Oregon case, the Hammonds have surrendered to serve the sentence for arson on BLM land which they received after a trial and are not fighting or asking anyone to fight for them. In fact they have asked that the militias stay away. The actual militias are staying away and a lot of wannabe militia people that are untrained and unversed in the Constitution are again making noise. They made a serious mistake in moving from the land, which they had a right to defend if the Hammonds wanted to, to a government building, which they do not. As long as the state consents to the Federal Government having that building there, it is a public government building and doing anything to restrict access to that building or to assault in any way the officials or public that are in or approaching that building is illegal and subject to severe penalties.

I am one who believes the Federal government often and in many ways oversteps its legal bounds, whether it is by monitoring our communications without legally obtained warrants or intimidating people into plea-bargains to get convictions where they are not warranted or land grabs to create national monuments or executive orders in direct contradiction of the US Constitution or any number of other questionable activities. They do have the right to protect their employees and the legal forts, armories and etc. (federal buildings) that they have received permission from the states to build. If you question the intention of the founders on this, just research the Whiskey rebellion that George Washington took action to stop. He intervened when the property of the tax collector was threatened along with the tax collector himself. President Washington requested that the governors in the area send their state militias to defend the government employee and his home and office.

To sum up, both sides have made mistakes. As I write this, an uneasy stalemate seems to be in place, but I am afraid it will not last unless both sides understand how they are creating a dangerous situation without understanding the principles involved. I hope that cooler heads will prevail and that neither side will think that they are justified in making a “statement” by harming the other.

Lynn West is a thinker, a teacher and a patriot. You can reach him through email at forgingthefuture2021@gmail.com or through this newspaper. Liberty is a state of being which must be continually created. These articles can help all of us discover the ways we can contribute to that outcome. 

Comments are closed.