>> I am not a troll, but I do have cynical tendencies. <<

You and me both, friend.

>>As an outside observer, I am constantly surprised at the incredible (and increasing) restrictions that citizens of the "land of the free" will put up with <<

As an inside observer, I share your surprise. Repeatedly. Often. Continuously. It's very hard to believe that the same people who fought two world wars in the name of "freedom" are now pepared to surrender it, as a culture, to suppress some fanatics with box cutters.

As was pointed out, FEMA (and probably some other agencies) have pretty much carte blanche to suspend the constitution for the duration of whatever is officially deemed an emergency. How likely that is to happen, or to be abused, or what capabilities might be in place to enforce such, I'm not in a position to judge.

However, since my family was one of the victims of Andrew Jackson's famous regard for the constitution:

"(Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

I do tend to be ever so slighltly cynical about the motivations of such moves. More generally, I suspect that the study of history makes one cynical. Perhaps that's why it's apparently no longer encouraged.

However, trying to discuss what might be "legal" after a power grab of that magnitude (theoretical or historical) is probably moot... what's legal will be whatever the people with the most guns say is legal.

Now, if we try to define that as TEOTWAWKI, then we also have to define exactly how that's different from now... <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I enjoy the conversation, but I suspect we're nearing the edge of what's considered acceptable for this forum, and I have no desire to add to the moderator's heartburn... I suggest we let it fade away quietly.