There you go again. You made a mistake by conflating the Watertown incident with a hypothetical imposition of martial law, and now you're forced to construct a passably logical explanation for doing so.
It still doesn't hold water because your entire argument rests upon the assumption that the government would attempt to pacify the people by telling them that those jack booted thugs outside their doors, are only there for their protection and safety. Meanwhile, they're watching their neighbors being hauled into the street and beaten down to the ground before being hauled off to never never land.
You can post thousands of words to me if you like, but you can't knock me off topic, and I'm not going to let you off the hook for the presumptions of cowardice you've leveled at my countrymen.
For the third (or is it fourth) time now, a declaration of martial law by any wanna-be dictator in the Oval Office is going to result in:
A. An immediate and horrific breakdown in cohesion among the several branches of the U.S. military, as the troops' loyalties to their countrymen and the Constitution vs the mad dictator, break across ideological lines. Instant internal warfare would be the likely result, with a very real possibility that a significant contingent would seek to arrest and imprison the CIC for treason.
B. The immediate assumption of a war posture by the armed citizenry in this country, who number 100,000,000 strong. Even if only one in ten were to adopt that posture, you're still talking about a domestic insurgency of 10,000,000 armed and very dangerous individuals who cannot be talked down, and who will not disarm or back off until the threat to their life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, is removed.
Our entire military couldn't handle an estimated fifteen thousand Islamic insurgents in Iraq. Even with a 'no-holds-barred' ROE, what makes you think they can handle TEN MILLION armed citizens who will fight to the death to protect their families, homes, and country from a government gone mad?
As I stated before, the hard left is playing with fire here, and is bucking for the complete demise of their political power, all influence, and very possibly the continued existence of their political philosophy in this country. If they decide to go forward with the ultimate test of the people's resolve, it will end badly for them.
times like these are why the founders included the second amendment, and why the government is doing all they can to make ammo scarce
I did not say anything about the imposition of martial law by decree. It can be imposed without such a declaration such as Watertown and as you demonstrated - will be accepted and considered justifiable in the name of safety and security.
A decade plus and we’re still taking off shoes, belts and submitting to every humiliation a TSA agent decides if we want to fly. We watch grannies get harassed, Children touched, vets having to humiliate themselves and strip their prosthesis from themselves. We make no waves. We tolerate every injustice - so we can get our little piece of what we need. Seatbelt checkpoints and soon ObamaCare Insurance proof. We tell ourselves that we need to trade a little liberty for security so we are “safe”. We tell ourselves that if it’s for the children, or the environment or the poor or the minority - we need to accommodate and surrender everything from the amount of water in our toilet to what we can eat at a movie theater.
That is not a hallmark of a people who are going to resist the imposition of tyranny. We already tolerate the tyranny and make excuses to tolerate it. We shrug our shoulders and say ‘what can we do’?
You have not answered a single one of my questions postulated, you ignored them because they make my point if you answer them honestly.
You are too much wishful thinking about how this country is going to react when facts, history and human nature are honestly considered. Even recent history.
You put your faith in a people who are allowing and accommodating every infringement on their liberties in the name of safety and security or fairness. You are trusting a people who sat on their hands while their free exercise of faith was rendered irrelevant in the culture until government became this culture’s god.
If this people are not going to stand up for their faith in the culture - why should we assume they are going to stand against the imposition of tyranny and subjugation when half the country wants to be dependent on government for their subsistence?
A people that refuse to believe and accept what is happening to them never arrive at the point they are able to resist the absolute horror their own government is going to unleash on them.
They are the ones who end up in mass graves.