What happens if they declare martial law?

[spinbaby]

I've been seeing martial law mentioned here a lot lately. What exactly is meant by that? If it means the military in our streets, what military? If it means they do whatever they want without paying attention to the law, how is that different from what they're doing now?

[John Q. Citizen]

1. It means curfews, shoot on site orders, mass detentions. n/t

[Selatius]

8. It sounds like my home after Katrina.

Except they didn't round all of us up and put us on military bases. That was happening further west in New Orleans.

[MUAD_DIB]

11. Who will be shooting who on sight?

[northzax]

2. exactly, we don't have nearly the military capability

to enforce martial law. hell, we can't enforce it in Baghdad, let alone LA.

remember, to make martial law work, you actually need the military to cooperate, think of anyone you know in the military (I know a few only) can you imagine them shooting fellow Americans in the streets? seems unlikely, don't you think?

[MUAD_DIB]

20. I'm sure there are a few that wouldn't care if they had the

chance at shooting you or an Iraqi.

I've known a few nuts that have been in the army. One was discharged for nearly running over his Sergent.


I think that, knowing how many guns this country has, to start a shooting war here at home would be the last thing a sane person would want. If I knew of a friend or a loved one getting shot I would have to quickly decide which side I was on and act.


Wouldn't you?

That being said there are still a few nuts that might like to just start shooting.

[Individualist]

27. It has happened before - Kent State

and it can happen again.

[MUAD_DIB]

31. I wouldn't want to see that happen. If they started shooting people prehaps the

people would start shooting back.

[John Q. Citizen]

43. Except the people don't have the fire power the feds do. It would be over pretty

quick.

[paparush]

35. Blackwater.. We've bought and paid for them.

[BluePatriot]

3. I don't know why they'd bother.

So many people are complacent anyway, why rock the boat? If I were of their mindset I'd continue abusing the current system like usual and throw out the occasional "bone" (tax cut/wedge issue/new reality show or gadget) to keep the masses happy and/or divided.

[Deep13]

4. We all ignore it.

[bryant69]

5. Your asking how things would change if they had soldiers in the streets?

How bad is it where you live?

Martial law implies curfews, outlawing of demonstrations, elimination of rival points of view. In the modern age it would probably also include shutting down websites such as this one (a sort of virtual kristalnacht).

Martial law is a pipe dream for both us and them. I'm not saying it's not possible, but it would effectively end the Republicans as a political party. And regardless of how much you despise the current crop of Republican Hopefuls - they aren't running like it doesn't matter.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. "Martial" means "military"

"Martial law" means that the military is in command of everything and that the military commanders (and ultimately, our "Commander in Chief") may, without recourse to civil laws or civil rights, do as they deem fit. Martial law is not necessarily fascist, but it is by definition despotic. I leave the distinction as an excercise for the reader, essays due Friday. :hi:

[LSparkle]

9. Hey, I'd rather have somebody like Gen. Schoomaker or Wes Clark in charge

than a nitwit like the Pretzeldent and Swingin Evil Dick.

[kestrel91316]

18. He's already doing this, don't you think??

......our "Commander in Chief") may, without recourse to civil laws or civil rights, do as they deem fit.......

[TechBear_Seattle]

24. We are not under martial law yet

For now, we are still goverened by the tattered remains of the United States Constitution. I can't help feeling like the proverbial frog in the saucepan, though.

I expect that if martial law ever becomes a reality, it will never be declared. Rather, it will arrive as unnoticeably as the winter solstice, the slow, inevitable fall into cold and dark.

[BuyingThyme]

7. Already did . Nothing happened.

[rec_report]

10. KBR's detention centers will be filled...

n/t

[spinbaby]

15. Shudder

They did build them for a reason, now, didn't they?

:scared:

I'm trying to imagine how they'd go about it.

[rec_report]

28. Yes, they get $385M per year, and you know that Cheney will make sure...

that the contract (1-year base period with four 1-year options) is renewed!
More here:
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B62C8724D%2DAE8A%2D4B5C%2D94C7%2D70171315C0A0%7D&dateid=38741%2E5136277662%2D858254656

[guitar man]

12. Arm yourselves

Never wanted to have to say that, but, if they want to play rough, we have to be ready to give it right back to them.

[left is right]

34. Bushco has made me rethink every opinion I have held about gun ownership

I, like many liberals, thought that guns should be strictly regulated. I thought a lengthy waiting period would save lives. I thought that relatively few people needed a carry permit. I approved of the push to install gun locks on almost every gun. All of that is rapidly changing. I haven't bought a gun, yet. But I am beginning to think that every true patriot should own a gun and know how to shoot it. I think every one should be prepared to protect the constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic--mostly domestic

[guitar man]

38. I was raised on a farm

There were plenty of guns in the house and I was taught how to safely and responsibly use them from a young age. Did a hitch in the USMC, so I'm well versed in firearms.

I too have always had a concern for public safety, mostly over the last 20 years as more and more seeming idiots wound up with guns.

However, the despots we see in the WH are the very reason the founders put the 2nd Amendment into the Constitution.I know there are those whos would argue that our modern, high powered military would roll over any militia-style resistance they encountered with relative ease.

Oh really??

[jimshoes]

13. I think local law enforcement

would play a huge role in doing the gov's bidding. Papers please ... but there won't be any of that please bizness. but just maybe, the people will just say uh uh, time for you to retire to Paraguay or where ever.

[kestrel91316]

14. Easy. EVERYONE ignores it. They can't shoot us all.

[no_hypocrisy]

16. Your local police become your wardens for one thing.

You are not necessarily confined to your house and can only leave with a government-issued pass, but on the other hand, you are likely to be told not to be "on the streets" as a curfew after dark without a "purpose".

I'm wondering how wholesale martial law can be called without the national and international economies collapsing. The ability to freely move is a necessary factor in order to move goods, provide services, have workers travel to their jobs, consumers purchase, etc. I suspect they'll call it martial law but hassle selected individuals whose dossiers they've created with all that wiretapping, mail-opening, internet surveillance.

[meldroc]

29. Exactly right. Police would enforce "martial law" in our case.

There isn't enough military to do it, but there is enough police to do it. Gonzales has been exercising federal, state and local police forces in things like Operation Falcon (see this Smirking Chimp article for details.) They'll likely get some help from mercenaries working for Blackwater and other companies. Of course, to round up all the undesirable, they have those FEMA/KBR camps on standby - some are already built, more can be up and running in a matter of weeks if the federal government pulls the trigger on that contingency contract.

So I guess what would happen wouldn't necessarily be described with the term "martial law" as well as it would be described by the words "police state."

[paparush]

36. Think..BLACKWATER.

"Now, get your ass to church before we flame throw your dog."

[MUAD_DIB]

37. I don't think there would be nearly enough police.

[Selatius]

45. There isn't if it's watching/monitoring the general populace, there is if we simply target activists

The number of activists relative to any population is always rather small. Most ordinary people do not warrant much surveillance if any, but the activists, historically speaking, have always been the first to be targeted in any government crackdown.

[Old and In the Way]

17. What if they declared martial law....and no one listened?

Sorry, we can only hope that Bush-Cheney would do this. That would be their last governing act.

[no_hypocrisy]

19. The law enforcement authorities shoot a few people in order to get

the rest of the malcontents to listen. Works like a charm . . .

[BayCityProgressive]

25. It already happened and no one did anything

Only reporters favourable to the GOP are allowed near the WhiteHouse,, New Orleans is under strict police control, the Patriot Actw as passed-basically shredding civil liberties. They can ALREADY arrest you without proof and put you in a center because of that act. Bush has passed bills making him in charge of local law enforcement and national guard, and now he is even trying to get a bill passed that would allow him to monitor the internet. Police State with a hidden face.

[MUAD_DIB]

39. Just like in Iraq?

Even if 1% of the population revolted it would be enough to seriously threaten the GOPigs.

[razors edge]

21. Total collapse of the economy.

no paychecks, no Gi Joes with the kung fu grip get sold, etc.

[spinbaby]

23. Can't have that

Must shop. So the idea is to round up the dissidents and keep the rest of us shopping, right?

And who are the dissidents?

Why, that would be us.

:scared:

[razors edge]

26. They might actually prefer

an all out revolution to the problem of just sitting on us.

Some of them will make money selling bullets and band aids.

[catnhatnh]

22. It merely means more of what we are seeing now...

...right now as we sit there is nothing you, I, or anyone else can singly do to challenge the rights they have already infringed...if tomorrow they declared your mother, or father, or child, or spouse an "enemy combatant" there is nothing on the face of the planet that ANYONE could do...that person could be sent anywhere in the world, detained indefinitely, denied due process and tortured until they "confessed"...As we sit they could be analyzing the keystrokes on your computer and deciding if you are worth disappearing...your financial record-they have them...your telephone-tapped at their fiat...declaring marshal law is a formality-a mere announcement of a fait accompli...to be done when those less threatening than you need to be silenced.

[slackmaster]

30. The country is way too big to put the whole thing under martial law

:nuke:

[MissMarple]

32. Huge conflicts within the military. HUGE.

Maybe even a type civil war.

[bonito]

33. We all run around policing ourselves

:crazy: :think:

[nealmhughes]

40. Wolverines!

Pat Swazey would be kicking butt in Colorado mountains...

[rug]

41. If that occurs, this government will be overthrown.

[EFerrari]

42. Yes. So, it won't happen because then Wall Street would be screwed. nt

[On the Road]

44. Martial Law Would Need A Huge Crisis at This Point

in order to sell it to the public and even the military. The chances are getting slimmer of it's ever being enacted in the foreseeable future.

[sendero]

46. It's ..

... not going to happen. The people who think it is are major league deludiniods.

Conservatives and even drooling wingnuts would not accept it, much less the center and the left. There is no constituency in America that would accept martial law declared capriciously, or for nefarious reasons.

There are plenty of real issues to worry about, Iran, the economy, the unbelievable corruption in Washington. Martial law isn't even on the long list.