The "want to be" gun confiscators would have a daunting job ahead of them

[stanc]

Stan, this man has "'been there, done that" in closely related activities. I would follow his advice and read several texts on insurgencies. If you need suggestions, please ask and several of our participants will be happy to suggest them

Thanks, but I read enough about insurgencies in younger years that I don't need to read more now. Apparently he misread what I wrote, because I never said that I think lightly armed insurgents will take on tanks with carbines. To the contrary, I said that insurgents would need much more capable weapons to defeat tanks.

And before you claim you would not sacrifice yourself, remember that both current and past history shows that folks have often been willing to sacrifice their lives to create an effect they need for their cause.

I make no claim one way or the other. It would be quite illogical to claim I know what I would do in a scenario that is purely hypothetical.

Our founding fathers understood that and knew that the right to keep and bear arms is a critical item in the checks and balances between civil liberty and effective governance.

As a "check and balance" on government, the RKBA is quite ineffective. The people have owned guns ever since the nation's founding, but that has neither prevented the enactment and enforcement of unconstitutional laws, nor caused their repeal.

No, the Second Amendment is not one of the checks and balances that is intended to keep government under control. It's more of a "Custer's Last Stand" option to try to deal with a government that has already run amuck. If it reaches that point, all of the system checks and balances have failed.

Returning to LR's advice, please educate yourself in this area

Repeating my answer: Done it before. Don't need to do it again.