It is the year 2020. A new president has just been elected and the old one refuses to leave office, suspending the norms of government and declaring marital law.
The election was a fraud, and these measures are necessary to preserve the nation, he says.
What are the chances of such a scenario? I would say little. I think our courts and our military and our people would realize that such a way of doing things just isn't the way things are done. No, not in America.
Coups are for other countries, not for America.
But, I will confess that when I think of President Trump, I somewhat wonder if he is not capable of such an audacious move.
And, yes, I wonder if, for him, the people might even follow.
The reason I bring up this scenario, is that we are told that we cannot ban guns, because that leaves open the possibility government will take away our freedoms. I'm just trying to think of a scenario where that could happen. Now, lets say a president did declare martial law, and did declare all bets -- I mean, all freedoms-- off for the moment, in order to deal with the crisis. Would our having guns make a difference?
What would those having guns, do with their guns? Would they march on the White House?
Think of this, also: Those who cite the Second Amendment as a defense against tyranny largely fall into the Trump camp. If it were Trump taking over the country, would they still be inclined to take up their guns?
But, if they did, could their guns do any good? If they marched on the White House, would a few missiles quickly stop them? Or, could they go guerrilla and fight a war not out in the open and, indeed, make a difference?
My first thinking is that they couldn't make much of a difference, but then I begin to wonder.
If we are to argue that guns are a defense against tyranny -- if we are to argue that nations fall when guns are lost -- then it would be good to think up possible scenarios such as this, and to think them through, so as to consider if the threat is valid.
No comments:
Post a Comment