This is quite a high number considering that many wouldn't admit to such thoughts even if they were thinking it. ------ Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University. The poll, which surveyed 863 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/-3.4, focused on both gun control and the possibility of a need for an armed revolution in the United States to protect liberty. The survey asked whether respondents agreed, disagreed, neither agreed nor disagreed or did not know or refused to respond to the statement: "In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties" Twenty-nine percent said they agreed, 47 percent said they disagreed, 18 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed, 5 percent said they were unsure, and 1 percent refused to respond. Results of the poll show that those who believe a revolution might be necessary differ greatly along party lines: ⢠18 percent of Democrats ⢠27 percent of Independents ⢠44 percent of Republicans The poll found that 38 percent of Americans who believe a revolution might be necessary support additional gun control legislation compared to 62 percent of those who don't think an armed revolt will be needed. Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and analyst for the poll, says: "The differences in views of gun legislation are really a function of differences in what people believe guns are for. If you truly believe an armed revolution is possible in the near future, you need weapons and you're going to be wary about government efforts to take them away." The poll was conducted nationally between April 22 and April 28, 2013. http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwy...s-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary
This is really a shocking poll. PSPR is surely correct in saying it has to understate the true number of people who feel this way. Obviously, the treachery of both political parties has not gone unnoticed.
Much better than a violent response, would be a march on D.C. Think about it. 100 million people marching on D.C. They have one person representing them. This person will have a document which includes grievances and a suggested amended constitution. The document will be placed onto the steps of the capitol.
I still wish tar and feathers were an option. If only we could take the biggest douchebag from each party and publically tar and feather them...think of the message that would send to the others. I think combined with your solution, results could then be achieved (but only if the tar and feathering was conducted on all national TV and local affiliates simultaneously, especially if it occurred during the halftime of a major sports event...like the Super Bowl).
Why isn't it? I mean the only reason it's "not an option" is because we voluntarily removed it as an option. And or collectively we are unwilling to include it as an option. Along with a number of other options we seem unwilling to engage in. Voting the bums out of office for example.