Laws must be enforced to have effect. The government enforces those laws. Thus, who enforces the laws against the government?
How do I insult myself?
I don't own any guns. Never have, never will. They're too dangerous. But I respect other poeple's rights to own them.
There will be a handful in the military who may refuse to follow the order. Many more will know it's wrong, but will follow the orders anyway because they don't want to get into trouble. The vast majority of young men and women in the military these days would follow such an order unquestioningly, because they simply do not know any better.
Stopped by who? Even IF there is a suit (after the damage is done, mind you), and even if SCOTUS rules in it's favor (which is less likely if it is full of liberal appointees), who is going to enforce the ruling? Once again, we come back to who enforces laws against the government?
I'm saying the government is full of men who either don't believe the laws apply to them, or more likely they recognize that the laws apply to them but they also know they don't have to obey them because nobody will enforce the laws against them. American history has proven time and again that this is the case.
Disagreement doesn't change the reality of the situation.
The reality of the situation according to you... but according to me, and I'd guess the vast majority of the country, we're a nation that lives MOSTLY true to the constitution, with some hiccups from time to time.
You seem to feel that this isn't the case, and you can disagree just like I can, but your claimed version of reality is no more real than my version. I'm a student of history as well, a student of supreme court cases throughout our history & the fact that once a law/ act is ruled unconstitutional we generally undo/ end what was being done. I see little thing where small groups or individuals do things that I personally feel are contrary to the general ideals of the constitution, but in general I'd say that's not the norm. Some in gov would LOVE to think they're above the law, and SOME truly are... but again, nowhere NEAR on the scale it seems to me that you're referring to.
To directly go against the 2nd amendment of the US constitution would be such a huge step, I just don't see it happening. Either way... I've got a mine & many other hiding places... someone who comes to my house with the intent of removing weapons will have a significant project on their hands, and I don't think I'm alone in this.
Btw, my comment about you "insulting yourself" was incorrect, sorry about that. I assumed you were a gun owner, and in turn should have said that you insult gun owners, if you think that some or most of us would allow anyone to go against the constitution & remove our firearms without a fight.
btw, who enforces laws against the gov... the court system. The WHOLE point of the way the founders structured our government was with checks & balances, including our ability to vote in representatives, and their ability to override BO assuming he's the one in power, or whoever in the exec branch needs to be overridden.
Btw, as a right/center person I will admit I'm often surprised by SCOTUS decisions... Citizens United V fec is one that AMAZES me. Not a chance in hell that our founders, or any "living document" believers would have ever agreed with that. You think the court is liberal... that decision goes so far the other way that I just can't agree. On the other hand they upheld OC... which was a game more of semantics than anything, but another one I can't say I agree with, but they opened a door to another way to eliminate it, so hopefully we can capitalize on that.