"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

If enough people decide they dislike the decision on the top of the
steps they may decide to take the case into the streets. It would not
be the first time that gunfire changed a decision.

Or they may decide to amend the Constitution, which is what the founders
arranged so people wouldn't have to resort to gunfire. This isn't a
regional
issue like the Whiskey Rebellion or Shay's Rebellion. This is a national
issue. That's what amendments are for.

Amendments didn't work in 1776 where the same issue was at stake...

There was no Constitution in 1776. That's why we got one in 1789. So now we
have a Constitution that can be amended.

and are unlikely to work today when most voters are sheep on the govt
dole.
It will become a civil war between those with guns and those without.

I assume you know the outcomes of the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's
Rebellion, right? And then there was that little rebellion in the South.

Your rebellion fantasies run up against the inconvenient fact that, in a
democratic republic, the institution you're rebelling against is a
government of the people. The people's government tends to win. In the case
of the Whiskey Rebellion, Washington assembled a militia force larger than
the entire Continental army to put down a bunch of whiskey distillers who
thought they could lead a successful rebellion against the new federal
government. But the peoples' militia proved them wrong.

Rebellion fantasizers tend to have the mistaken impression that the rest of
the people really are on their side and will join the rebellion, like
Timothy McVeigh believed a few years ago.

--
Ed Huntress