well, if deranged Muzzies attack Garland again, why shouldn’t we have martial law to stomp out al-Qaeda sympathizers?
The Garland attack involved two gunmen; the state & local gov as well as a well armed citizenry can handle this thing and they did. However, if things did get out of hand, ie a substantial invasion or incursion by the enemy, then the state must act and ask for martial law.
That being said, the chief executive cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of the people. 0bama wants to destroy the nation and any pretext for martial law, police federalization etc would give him the opportunity for tyranny, that he relishes. Any federal action by 0bama, especially a military one, would be an attack on the people. In fact, can’t think of a more effective sympathizer in the U.S. of Al Qaeda or ISIS than 0bama.
Never let a crisis go to waste.