You’re making an awful lot of assumptions about me and how I live my life. That’s fine, but I’m not all that interested in being a sounding board for your frustrations with my country.

I have the means and the desire to do what you’re suggesting but when it comes down to it my desire to protect my family outweighs my desire to protect my country. At least for now that seems the wiser choice for me personally, and I suspect that is true for a lot of others as well.

The problem is that there’s no clear line to delineate what that decision should hinge on. If you asked me 10 years ago where the line is I probably would have said somewhere well behind us now. Still, I know what will happen to me and my family if I’m the one to act first and that familial preservation instinct is difficult to overcome. Choosing to be first through the breach, so to speak, is a heavy burden to bear.

I think that dilemma is what prevents most who are predisposed to act from choosing to act, more so than a lack of knowledge about the situation.

While there are certainly flaws in the American system of government, this is not the result of one man simply being above the law. There are plenty of existing ways to stop this from happening but half of the government is actively supporting his efforts. There is no system of government that can survive when the people who are charged with enforcing the rules collectively decide not to enforce them. At that point the specifics don’t matter.