I have always felt that the notion of having arms to protect yourself from oppression by the government seemed odd. If it came down to it, you are so ridiculously out-gunned, out-trained, out-manned, it would be a rout.
My personal belief is that we seem to have forgotten the qualifier of the 2nd Amendment "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Apparently well regulated militia means hodge podge of random gun owners.
It's one of the things that strikes me as odd as a Canadian. I get that I have a bias about it, but I've also grown up on a farm, owned guns as a kid, and that kind of thing.
But needing to pack around one with you just seemed... impolite
. And dangerous. Kind of like smoking, I guess.
And the weirdest bit was to make sure your own government is afraid of you. I mean, it's your
government. You own it, you vote for it, and it's bound (theoretically) by the same laws that you are. It seems weird to defend yourself against... well, yourself, essentially. But I also understand that there's a deep sense in many places that the government is not yours, and you've lost control of it through corruption, gerrymandering, lobbying, etc. But again, I don't see how owning guns is going to fix those things. Fixing those things would require direct participation in the political process, not guns.