You mention a interesting new angle that nobody has every really brought up. The concept that you can have trial of some sort, and the theory that these trials are not simple rubber stamps or railroad stations. Now the Nazis had tonnes of trials and on paper everything their cult did was legal. The USSR has done sumilar trials where basically you are already sentanced but it is more entertaining to humiliate you in a mock trial.
I think that the problem is the fact that many people can't well how do I say it. They simply can't play chess with their life very well. If you deliberately structure a high control group (this is a multi trillion dollar business) there is nothing you can do to it period except destroy it, leave in exile, or live with it. The next phase is are those actions legal. For example it is illegal to destroy the marines, it is illegal to go AWOL in the marines, it is legal to live with the marines. So you have to choose do you want to break the law or not.
It seems the right to kindnap (jail) you or kill you is the main divider.
The original congreessional army (that fought the british) was nothing like this and if you got fed up you could just take your gun and go home as it was all volunteer (plus you had to bring your own gun and clothes anyway).
Lets go to JWs it is illegal to destroy them except via civil means, you can leave jws any time you want, at least here it is legal to be a JW (but it is not so everyplace).
It seems like the JWs are far weaker and have less control thant the military (no duh), but they dont have a concept of being broght to justice (note the military has never been brought to justice only individuals from it have). The weird thing is to bring a military to justic you have to basically conquer them. Nobody seems to ever think of bringing the whole military to court to be disbanded, but I have heard people talk about bringing the whole of JWs to court be disbanded.
What is this safety people feel when a stranger in green or kaki with a m-16 and the letters U.S."something or nother" on his BDU. Vs a guy with a cheap suit from JC penny or Bullocks and a cobbled together translation of the bible and the uncanny habbit of standing in front of dougnut shops lack? Thats a serious question.