[skinkinthegrass]

What I find interesting coming from my liberal friends is their total lack of acceptance that a government could turn on its people to the point that the people would feel compelled to fight back. I always get the eye roll, OMG sigh and the ‘it’s not the 18th century anymore’ comment.maybe b/c it is becoming apparent; that events are similar / repeating
the 1770s (Boston Tea Party..Boston Massacre ..et al)...
Federal Cronyism / Executive Branch = Monarchism = Totalitarianism, are becoming indisputable similar...
..0'ButtCrack shall sign an EO (01/18/2013 Friday Night), doing what he couldn't
do in Congress..history repeat itself..again..again.

[lentulusgracchus]

The scholar of the Second Amendment tends to put it this way (not disagreeing with you):

Freedom of speech may or may not protect pornography; but it would be difficult, probably impossible, to infer the monumental scale and solidity of that amendment from this one solitary inflection in its surface. The same is true of the right to bear arms. The history of its formulation and invocation makes clear that whatever its relation to the realm of individuals and the private uses they have devised for guns, [34] the amendment came into being primarily as a way of [Page 1269] dispersing military power across the entire population. Like voting, like reapportionment, like taxation, what is at stake in the right to bear arms is a just distribution of political power.

--http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Scarry1.html