Firearms and Southern independence

M-16sFor some reason, I find myself thinking of firearms and associated topics at the end of one year and the start of another. I suppose I still link the subject to the fact that as a boy I got to hunt with my Daddy, Granddaddy, and great uncles at this time of year. I associated the thrill of shooting with my blood relations, like most Southern Celts I knew.

The year 2015 marks the 300th anniversary of the Scottish Jacobite rising known as the Fifteen. Many Southerners take pride in their Scots and general Celtic ancestry. The Scots, Irish, and Welsh of old were fierce fighters who would not tolerate tyranny. They rose from time to time to defend their liberties with the sword and musket. After the Fifteen Uprising, the British government passed something called The Disarming Act. The purpose of such legislation was made clear by its title: “An act for the more effectual securing the peace of the highlands in Scotland” (1716). It outlawed anyone in the Scottish Highlands and Isles from having “in his or their custody, use, or bear, broad sword or target, poignard, whinger, or durk, side pistol, gun, or other warlike weapon unless authorised.” The Scots responded by turning in junk and hiding their good weapons.

This act proved ineffectual, and in 1725 “An act for the more effectual disarming the highlands in that part of Great Britain called Scotland; and for the better securing the peace and quiet of that part of the kingdom” was passed by Parliament and more effectively enforced by Major-General George Wade. Wade succeeded in confiscating a significant number of useful weapons, though the Highlanders still managed to hide many weapons for future use. And that “future use” was the Jacobite Uprising of 1745-46.

History teaches us that men often have to fight to win and preserve their freedom. We in The League of the South are advocates of Southern independence and freedom. Without firearms, Southerners will not be able to win their independence and regain their ancient liberties. Without firearms, Southerners, and all other Americans, will become the modern equivalent of medieval serfs. But to be rendered defenseless and made to bow the knee to tyrants is not in our DNA. We are fighters, and fighters need weapons. They are our tools.

Because of school and other public venue shootings over the past few years, two things regarding firearms have happened: 1) the regime and their gun-grabbing allies have ratcheted up their campaign to further curtail the Second Amendment rights of citizens and 2) the citizens—especially rural and small town folk in the South and elsewhere—have been buying up firearms and ammo like there was no tomorrow. Now, I’m no genius but I can see great potential for some conflict with this scenario.

The folks who are buying all these guns and ammo do not intend to register them or turn them into any government agencies. They are buying weapons and ammo, I believe, with the intent of using them, and perhaps sooner rather than later, depending on the actions of Obama and Congress. God help us if they are not determined to use these things in defense of their liberty against any and all tyrants. For if they are once disarmed, they can never again call themselves free men of the South.

Balance this scenario against the government’s apparent intention to disarm the citizenry and you have the ingredients for a hot old time, but only under extreme circumstances. I have spoken with gun owners, law enforcement officers, gun sellers, and assorted other groups and have determined at least two things: 1) most folks are not registering or giving up anything; and 2) there are not too many local volunteers eager to man the gun round-up squads. Currently, there are an estimated 300 to 400 million guns in the U.S. and most are in the hands of about 100 million people who presumably take the Second Amendment seriously.

But let’s assume for argument’s sake that only a meager 10% of gun owners prove to be ornery enough to resist an Obama Executive Order (which will be of dubious legal standing) and/or a “law” from Congress and refuse to register or turn in their guns. That still leaves 10 million Outlaws with 30-40 million firearms and several billion rounds of ammo. And let’s say that when the fun starts that one-third of federal, State, and local Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) refuse to carry out unlawful and immoral orders. That would leave about 650,000 LEOs collaborating with Uncle Sambo. Moreover, let’s divide up the soldiery the same way. That would put about 1.6 million soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines at DC’s disposal. Now most of these will be non-combat, support personnel and will not be trained for front line duties.

According to my math, then, that would pit 10 million gun owners against about 2.3 million LEOs and military personnel. That would be a bloody conflict if both sides went at it in earnest. But it probably won’t happen this way. Why not, you ask? Because it is highly unlikely, in this writer’s opinion, that State and local LEOs and U.S. military personnel are going to relish getting involved in combat actions that pit them against Cousin Stanley and other kith and kin. Yes, but “orders are orders,” you might argue. Well, not really. One is obliged to carry out lawful orders; otherwise, they can—and surely will—be ignored by some LEOs and soldiers. And don’t even think it’s going to be the Russian or Chinese disarming the American gun-owing public. If nothing else, the tyrants, foreign and domestic, know about the Army of Southern Deer Hunters. And if you think “assault weapons” are a threat, you ain’t seen a skilled marksman with a scoped deer rifle at 800 yards!

If there is indeed an organized attempt to confiscate firearms, it probably will be carried out by agents of the BATF&E and some other renegade federal agencies. Sure, there may be some State and local LEOs who participate, but I would bet that that situation won’t last long.

The County Sheriff will be the key official in any attempt to disarm the people. I recently read an article in which the author had surveyed over 200 County Sheriffs across the land and only one had equivocated on this answer. The other 199 had said without reserve that they would defend the citizens of their counties against any attempts to deprive them of their Second Amendment rights. The County Sheriff is, of course, the highest ranking authority in his jurisdiction, and peace officers such as Richard Mack and Joe Arpaio, among others, have done yeoman work in spreading this message.

If the County Sheriff’s do their duty to those who elected them, then that will be the main bulwark against any effective gun confiscation, either directly or indirectly. Direct gun confiscation would indeed be a messy business, especially if the County Sheriff actively opposed it by deputizing thousand of his county’s citizens. Under these conditions, not even the U.S. military would stand a chance in carrying out disarmament in every County in the country. Indirect confiscation is more likely to be DC’s strategy. That would not require a dangerous door-to-door campaign; instead, it would mean that any “Outlaw” caught at a traffic stop or some other such individual confrontation would be taken down without much chance of opposing his oppressors.

As I write this, there are efforts in some of the Red States to pass legislation that would nullify any federal “laws,” Executive Orders, or court decisions intended to infringe on the gun rights of their citizens. Two of the most promising efforts are in Texas and Wyoming; however, I expect such resistance to spread like wildfire. Every citizen should write his State Representative, State Senator, Attorney General, and Governor demanding that they interpose themselves between DC and the citizens of the State in defense of gun rights and State sovereignty. Moreover, each citizen should write his County Sheriff to find out if he will use his office for the benefit of those who put him there or whether he’ll knuckle under to the feds (who do provide lots of money and goodies to State and local Law Enforcement). You’ll need to know where the elected officials in your State and County stand so you can make your plans to resist gun confiscation accordingly.

And gun confiscation will—and ought to—be firmly resisted. Rendering a man unable to defend himself and his family and their property is illegal and immoral. Moreover, it is the desire of cowardly tyrants to rule over a population of unarmed, cringing subjects who kowtow to their every command. In such a situation, men are not citizens—they are helpless subjects. We Southerners will never submit to any man or regime whose intent is to deprive us of our right of self-defense. For such a deprivation, history shows us, is a mere prelude to much worse tyranny, including dispossession and murder from both the elites and their underclass allies.

Without sufficient arms, the South cannot be free and independent. Remember that salient fact when the tyrant passes his “laws,” declares his court decisions, and announces his Executive Orders. Subjects cower before such oppression. Free men resist. You choose.

Michael Hill
Killen, Alabama

A favorite saying of The League of the South: An claíomh de na daoine—“The sword of the people”

Categories: Commentary

About Author

Michael Hill

Dr Michael Hill is President of the League of the South. He is a retired university professor of history and author of two books on Celtic warfare.