On October 8th, the FBI arrested 13 men, charging them over kidnapping or threats to the capitol. This resulted from a several-month long plot concocted by far-right Michigan extremists to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, their democratic governor, over her strict coronavirus regulations. They debated how best to execute their plan, some wanted to place a car bomb or pose as a food delivery service. Some advocated for storming the state capital, or attacking police and causing civil war. Luckily, these men caused no harm, but they went as far as testing explosives and heavily arming themselves. The FBI argued to Congress that white supremacists and violent extremists are the most critical threat facing America today, and 2019 saw the most deaths from domestic violence extremism since 1995.
One analyst described this unique combination of bitterness over coronavirus lockdowns, unemployment fears, racial justice/police protests, political party polarization, and long-term impact of veterans returning home from overseas as "the perfect storm of paranoia". Additionally, Donald Trump supported anti-government protests, tweeting "liberate Michigan", calling the armed protestors in the state capitol "good people". He never outwardly condemns terrorist groups, thrilling members of fringe militias such as the "Proud Boys".
This appals me, no president should encourage civil unrest and divisions within his or her country. Extremism is unavoidable regardless of the situation, but it should be far better handled than it was in this scenario. At the very least, Trump should have publicly criticized these groups, as staying silent would add to the problem. With the looming threat of domestic extremism, it's crucial that people in power manage these situations properly. The underlying issue is Trump's lackluster management of the pandemic, the protests, and his belief that the virus is a fraud, which is why he advocated to 'liberate' states. As a whole, Trump's management of the situation is unacceptable to me.
Here are some questions to consider:
1. How does easy access to guns affect domestic terrorism? How should this be weighed in gun rights debates? What changes should we make to ensure that plots like this can never be carried out?
2. How could Trump have better handled this? How do we prevent situations like this from occurring in the future? On the other hand, if people are unhappy with their leaders, what steps should they take to make change?
3. Why is Trump dividing the country right before the election? How would this tactic prove useful/unuseful with accumulating votes? How could this help/hurt him?
Sources:
https://www.economist.com/united-states/2020/10/17/the-plot-against-gretchen-whitmer
I think that there is no reason that people need some of these weapons that they own outside of personal enjoyment at shooting ranges, in which case they should be kept at the shooting range. The idea that they people can arm themselves against the government is ludicrous with the invention of new technologies and advancements and weaponry. However, I think that it doesn't really matter what the government does about gun restrictions. People can have their guns if they want. If someone wanted to purchase a weapon that could do a lot of harm and have intent to inflict harm, it is easy to do so illegally, thus making the sale of legal weaponry irrelevant. I think that Trump could have done a number of things to better handle this. Like you said, he could have condemned them or done a number of other things to make it clear that this would not be tolerated. I don't think there is a way to prevent this in the future because there will always be radicals and minorities with different views who are angry that they are in fact a minority, and therefore, don't hold as much power as they would like. If people don't like their leaders, they should take political and legal steps to take them out of power, not violent ones. That being said, there is a place for violent protest when atrocities perpetrated by a dictator are concerned. However, America is great because it is democratic, and therefore, that should not happen so there is no purpose for violence against the government. I think that the division of the country is not smart at all. I think that he may be trying to target a certain audience with his words and actions. This could be useful to gain support, but at the same time, if that appeal is to a small number of people, it won't be enough to get him back into office.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your initial statement that nobody needs these kinds of weapons for personal use. Because of differing gun laws at the state level, transporting high-powered guns across state lines is easy, making illegal purchase quite accessible like you mentioned. I agree that it's impossible to prevent radicalism or make everyone happy, but nothing of this magnitude should happen again. These people could've taken to violence because they either weren't aware of or satisfied with legal options, which is a problem we need to deal with. This situation isn't a dictator committing an atrocity, making violence unacceptable. I agree that dividing the country over this issue was a short-sighted move, Trump is only gaining the support of a small minority that likely already supported him, he may be sparking deep-held racist beliefs in some, but these people likely would've already voted for him as well. In the end, his handling of this situation makes him a more unpopular candidate.
DeleteI think what trump is trying to do by clearly siding with one side is hes trying to look firm and desive in choice. I think this could help him keep his voters from 4 years ago as they will vote again for what they belived in 4 years ago. this dividing of the isle could help him gain votes, but also aliente groups of voters. I Dont really know how benificial it will be for him till election night. Overall I don't really think trump could of handled this better besides maybe using excutive power to make an action against these "protesters" or afirming his views on domestic terrorism either be it good or bad. As for gun regulation that is a very complex and heated topic that cant really be asnwered by making it easier or harder to get a gun. In regards to domestic terrorism I think that people will always find a way to bypass gun laws such as 3-d printing, or the black market. I think instead the fbi should work on improving its information network to be able to prevent violent acts from occuring in the first place.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up an interesting point regarding his decisiveness that I highly agree with, but he'll likely keep his voter base from 4 years ago he's still popular with them. Even though he'll gain some voters from the far right, he'll lose undecided voters that disagree with his handling of this matter, but in this election there's an insignificant amount of undecided as is, so it'll be interesting to see if this even has an effect on election night. At the very least he could've condemned them instead of supporting them, that's the 'right' thing to do on the level of human decency: we shouldn't encourage kidnapping, but some don't see it that way. You bring up another interesting point regarding 3-D printing, like those who really want guns will always find a way to have them and develop creative solutions to attain them. The FBI prevented this plot and I agree that improving their informational network will stop violence at its source, but that brings up a privacy debate that is also a complex and heated topic.
DeleteThis whole plot, and the plotters’ abilities to be so heavily armed, to kidnap Michigan’s governor is outrageous, and Trump’s reaction is enraging. Guns can inflict serious harm and suffering when in the hands of people like those involved in this plot, and it’s unnerving to know that these kinds of people were let loose in the streets with such heavy artillery—the fact that these everyday citizens were able to access such weaponry is frightening itself. To add more salt to the wound, Trump said nothing against the people involved—he actually praised them. There is absolutely no logical or moral reason why such violent actions were needed; if people are upset with those representing them, there are other ways they can appropriately voice their opinion and call for change—again, there is no valid reason for the violent scheme that took place in Michigan. Trump encourages these behaviors because he believes that propagating discord and distrust of government improves his reelection chances, but at the expense of our country and civility.
ReplyDeleteEasy access to guns allow people who have domestic terrorism in mind to achieve their goals with almost no trouble. This should be used to prove that more gun control laws are needed, especially since many acts of domestic terrorism can be traced to the lack of restrictions on guns. Trump's response to these acts are unacceptable, and I believe he should have clearly condemned these acts instead of supporting the groups behind these actions. I believe the reason why he hasn't expressed public dislike for these groups is because he knows that they support his campaign and he doesn't want to lose any of those supporters. This might help him retain his supporters but might ultimately make undecided voters loose attention in his campaign.
ReplyDeleteEasy access to guns allow situations like this one to arise no doubt, but that is part of what we accept with our second amendment. However that is not to say that gun reform in this country isn't needed, cause it most definitely is. Any President of the United States should not be encouraging political division and extremism. Especially in this day and age when the mainstream news media pushes Americans further apart and causes this radicalization. I think the main issue here isn't the event itself but it's meaning. Which is that this country is tearing itself apart from the inside due to the rise of extremism.
ReplyDeleteThis post is closed; no new comments will be graded.
ReplyDeleteAs Patrick said before me, i think that a large amount of the weapons these people had are unnecessary. Furthermore, When a People are capable of overthrowing the government of even a state, it becomes seriously problematic and it becomes much more of a problem. Even Donald trump has started to radicalize a group of anti government groups and what is happening will bite back soon. We are on a collision course and i Don't know if we can stop in time.
ReplyDelete