Lessons
by The Hunter

July 06, 2009

The Second Amendment is not about sport shooting or hunting. It is about maintaining the possibility of an armed revolt or other armed action as a powerful deterrent against oppression. I was recently reminded how rare this understanding is even among active and aware believers in freedom. A long-time correspondent cut off contact with me seemingly over an off-hand observation that the sort of petty oppressions we read about in the news every day are exactly the sort of thing to drive a free people to that ultimate resort.

I believe quite firmly in both the theory of deterrence and the perilous risk of triggering that awful necessity risked by government’s increasing tyrannies. I suspect I am not alone in being more than a bit tired of regularly being accused of being a militia nut for holding these opinions and speaking out about them. Quite often the critiques come from people who should know better. 

It is unequivocally clear what the framers had in mind when they wrote the "embarrassing Second Amendment", to borrow the famously descriptive phrase of noted legal scholar Sanford Levinson 1 . The ratification debates make the revolutionary generation's opinion on the matter crystal clear.

What the doubting thomases don't bother to consider before they recoil in horror is that the shooting has already started. So far it’s an abortion doctor here, an overzealous prosecutor there, or a crooked judge out yonder. And so far its just nutcases doing the shooting - or as some people have called them, the canaries. I sincerely hope we can keep it that way.

But if the oppression keeps up, you're not going to see a full-scale guerilla war modeled on the American Revolution as so many romantically assume. At least not initially. You're going to see an ever-increasing groundswell of those shots in the dark aimed at politicians and public figures who have pushed oppressive measures thus making themselves unpopular. I'd really rather not see it come to that, because once the killing starts, it seems to nearly always spiral out of control. Besides, a lot of these people earnestly believe they are doing good and necessary things. (Paving stones to the nether regions notwithstanding.) Feeding them 150 grains of lead doing 2000 feet/second doesn't defeat their ideas, and it might very well give them a new lease on life. The ideas, I mean; the recipients of that sort of argument tend to be a little too busy getting acquainted with the workin' side of grass to spare any time to continue political debates.

One common complaint raised by those wanting to distance themselves from the notion of the preventive power of armed civilian action is that too few will act should the necessity arise. Our wavering allies are missing the important point that it does not take a large percentage of the population to successfully change the course of history. The first American Revolution was actively supported by around 30% of the population by most accounts. Far less than that actually fought in the battles.

Depending on whose numbers you believe; there are currently 60 to 80 million gun owners in the United States 2 . Between them they own at least 40% of the world's supply of small arms 3. I'll wager that they own a good portion of the ammunition stocks, too. A frighteningly large percentage of those people are damn good with their guns by anyone's standards. Sure, an awful lot of those guns come out of the closet once a year to go put a couple of ducks or a deer in the freezer. But let's not discount just how few people it takes to seriously gum up the works. Even a minuscule percentage of 80 million comes to an awful lot of potential motivated foot soldiers. We have very clear evidence just how few it takes, too.

My favorite example is Northern Ireland. The IRA has plagued the United Kingdom for the better (or worse) part of a century. Without getting into the rather complex history, for most of its existence the IRA has had no more than a couple of thousand members 4. The best estimates I've seen indicate that since the end of the Irish civil war in the 1920’s they seldom had more than a few hundred combat effectives operationally deployed. Since the late 1960s after long and arduous efforts the IRA have managed to accumulate an estimated inventory of around 800 small arms, and lost many times that in attempts to smuggle them into the country 5. NRA figures show that there are 10,000 state associations and local clubs in the US 6. Thousands of them probably are larger and better equipped than the IRA.

Ireland suffered under very restrictive British rule for generations. Unlike America they don't have a long-standing tradition of marksmanship and sport shooting proudly handed down in families since the country’s beginning, nor do they have ranges and gun clubs to practice in. Nor is it possible to walk into a local gun store and buy some of the most sophisticated weapons in the world, or mail order top quality ammunition. Yet they managed to fight one of the best counter-terrorist organizations in the world very effectively for all that time. Even during periods the British government gave the security forces carte blanche, and eventually they forced a political settlement. If you don't like that example, there are dozens of others that are equally instructive. Any place where a bunch of ill-equipped people are giving a fairly modern military force a run for their money has lessons to teach. If you prefer fiction, start with John Ross' Unintended Consequences.

Anyone care to put money on whether the United States can muster a few thousand or so people dedicated enough to run a similar campaign here? Or just what they might accomplish with the vastly superior level of equipment and training at their disposal? That is a wager I would really rather not see tested if you don't mind. Events are far too likely to get very ugly for everyone if that sort of thing starts. Every lunatic with a score to settle against anyone or a grudge of some sort will come out of the woodwork and join the carnage. Care to take a side bet on just what the luddites and anti-capitalists who are ripping around various cities the past couple of days would start doing? Or the racists and fanatics of every creed, color, and religion just itching for an excuse? I just wish somebody would dope-slap the statists pushing their little power-trips down people's throats, then sit them down and explain all this to them while there's still time - for them, and for us. 

Most of all, though, I wish that a lot of our allies (or at least enemies of our enemies) would stop undercutting the preventive power of the possibility by decrying loudly and wringing their hands every time somebody frankly discusses it. The surest way I can think of to ensure that the rather dire scenario I outlined above happens is to keep reassuring the tyrant wannabes that they have nothing to fear. I want those fear-mongering statists to gibber in terror and wet their pants at the very thought of daring to push around any American citizen. Or, for that matter, any free person anywhere in the world. The whole point of the rule of law is to prevent things from degenerating into that sort of chaos. The credible threat of armed revolt is the final guarantee that should never be discounted. Once you start doing that, you have conceded the political/philosophical fight to anyone who IS willing to pick up a gun, whether you bother to admit it or not, no matter the merit of your ideas.

1  "The Embarrassing Second Amendment" Sanford Levinson, 99 Yale L.J. 637-659 (1989).  

2 2001 NRA Firearm Facts cites 60-65 million.  GunTruths.com claims 65-80 million "Source: Department of Justice, NRA". National Institute of Justice says 44 million in "Guns in America", though this survey conducted by two notoriously anti-gun workers is considered suspect by many. It is the lowest estimate I found in my personal research, some less authoritative numbers run as high as 100 million.

3 The United Nations Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Small Arms claims the world stock of firearms is approximately 500 million (page 24 note 2). Estimates of the US civilian stock range from just under 200 million to nearly 300 million, depending on whose numbers you choose to use. (see sources cited in note 2) Even the most conservative reading of these numbers yields the 40% figure.

4 One good summary may be found in "The Irish Republican Army and the armed struggle in Irish politics" 

5 "Uncovering the Irish Republican Army" Jane's Intelligence Review Aug 1 1996, Sean Boyne 

6  2001 NRA Firearm Facts 

Hunter's Sixteenth Rule: There is a time to argue passionately for what you believe in... but there is also a time to gnaw off a leg in a desperate attempt to save your sanity.

The Hunter is an expatriate Kansas farmboy who went east to find his fortune years ago. What he found instead was a pack of damn-fool statists. He's been trying to lose them ever since. He splits his time these days between writing, cutting wood, shooting, wondering whether there are any freedom-loving single women in the world, and trying to survive and make ends meet in the howling wilderness of New England. He can usually be found slouching about the Liberty Round Table and annoying the libertarians there with blunt talk and stubborn practicality.

A Knight of Non-Aggression is a person committed to fighting institutionalized aggression, who has taken the following oath: