Here, here and NOW

Funny thing is, if they had weapons like that back then, the response would have been pretty much what this video shows. Weapons that would allow the citizens to more easily overthrow tyrannical governments...quick, write that into the BoR!

Yes, from my understanding the right to bear arms looks like it was entirely written with the intent of helping to fight off the British. It seems to me ironic but important that the same legislation has over the last century seemed to have done more to keep the American government that implemented the law in check.

@bcglorf - That was the original intent of the 2nd amendment, to allow the people to keep the government in check. They wanted to mitigate the possibility of any heads of state from becoming overzealous and using their power against the people. The British tried to put an embargo on firearms and tried to disarm the colonies in order to leave them defenseless against the British military, and the revolutionaries didn't want that to happen to the people again.

Checks and balances were a major part of the planning of our government. If the three branches somehow failed to keep each other in check, it would be up to the people to defend themselves from tyranny.

Nowadays local government is more likely a threat to individual citizens than is a tyrannical dictator, but the constitution doesn't seem to help much on that front. The only thing that seems to keep police in check, for example, is the video camera. And even then, innocent people end up dead, and cops end up with relatively light or no punishment.

That's human nature for you.