Share this story...
Military, protests, National Guard
Latest News

Ross: Why the GOP doesn’t mind using military to quell protests

Utah National Guard soldiers stand on a police line near the White House. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Some former and current military leaders seem genuinely concerned about the President declaring he would use the active duty military to “dominate” protesters.

Democrats, of course, quickly joined that criticism; but the question I’m hearing is why more Republicans haven’t spoken out on this. Republicans abhor big government – so why stay silent on this?

Well, I don’t know what’s in their hearts, but I know what you’ll find on conservative websites.

There’s an essay at The Federalist – and it doesn’t get more conservative than that – titled, “How The Second Amendment Prevents Tyranny.”

The essay says our nation’s founders opted “to rely for our defense primarily on an armed citizenry that can be called up as a militia.”

“If the people themselves are the military power of the state, then that power cannot be used against the people,” it continues.

That’s why the Second Amendment is a bedrock conservative principle.

And that, I believe, is why most Republicans are silent. They don’t see a problem here because were the President to go too far, the solution is built in. It’s the militia – today we call it the National Guard — which would make sure that federal military power could not be used against the American people.

Unfortunately, when you think about it, the scenarios get pretty ugly, right? It could mean anything from general mutiny to civil war.

Which might be another reason for the silence.

Listen to Seattle’s Morning News weekday mornings from 5 – 9 a.m. on KIRO Radio, 97.3 FM. Subscribe to the podcast here.

Most Popular