Not precisely. On one side, it would be an attempt at a coup d' etat, with the final step in assuming extraconstitutional power and rendering the document from which legitimate governmental authority flows moot and invalid.
On the other, it would simply be self-defense against a criminal gang, better equipped and better clothed than most, but with no more legal authority to govern than any biker gang or drug cartel- and deserving of exactly the same respect and support.
But it's quite possible that at least one side- and maybe both- would be less interested in attempting to wrest full control over all 50 states, then trying to wrap itself in the burnt charred remains of the ripped American flags that remain. During the XX Century Finnish Civil War, the Finns killed off about 1% of their population in a war that lasted but four months; during our War Between the States/ War of Yankee Dominance, we managed to kill about 2% of the US population, but only over 4-plus years. And in the Finnish example, only about a quarter could be considered *combat* deaths; the rest were executions or cases of those in prison simply allowed to freeze to death. Practical, those Finns.
In any event: between 1% and 3% of the US population of 301,139,947, [July 2007 U.S. Pop. est.]- well, you do the math.
Accordingly: CWII ping list PING!
On the other, it would simply be self-defense against a criminal gang, better equipped and better clothed than most, but with no more legal authority to govern than any biker gang or drug cartel- and deserving of exactly the same respect and support.
Exactly so. And good to hear from you archy, as always.
BTW, tagline, courtesy of ovrtaxt
The thing that everyone needs to remember is that most of the cops and a good portion of the military would just follow what ever the State tells them to.
So even if a gun ban results from this case (which is what I fear), I doubt that many will do much to protest. I know the NRA won’t.