Guns Are Needed To Defend Against Tyrannical Governments

Given the Hitlers encouragement of gun ownership before Nazi Germany and the complete lack of guns all around for Pol Pot's Army, I think we and anyone reading this that a Citizen Tyrannical Threat is a potential problem with or without civilian gun ownership. From what I can see, if people become desperate enough then they will choose tyrannical rule as long as their needs are better met by the ruler. Therefore I propose we focus the rest of this debate on External and the infamous Internal Tyrannical Threats. http://everythingpossiblehappens.blogspot.com... EXTERNAL THREAT I think right now is a good time to mention that the Internal and External threats may not be mutually exclusive. If an external army invaded the US, if the war became more and more desperate then the US may revert back to tyranny to better combat the external threat and potentially suffer for it later. Therefore I think it's safe to assume that for any (justified) war the US partakes in, we want to have as many advantages as possible. The more advantages we have, the less desperate the war (should) become. The less desperate the war, the less liberties should be taken away. If the US were invaded, there most certainly would be small pockets of resistance operating on their own, but I'm inclined to believe that most US citizens would work in conjunction with our primary Army in semi-organized retaliation. The main military is also likely to train civilians and distribute additional armaments to help combat the outside military, such as explosives and RPG's. A rough example of this could include the US sponsorship of the Israeli military to help fight anti-American terrorists (whether or not this is necessary or moral is a subject for another debate). http://www.fas.org... NOTE: For any readers glancing over this, sources may not as be as relevant as in other debates since this debate is completely hypothetical. Most of these ideas will just be logical presuppositions and best-guesses based on history. Internal Threat For the sake of simplicity, let's assume we are solely dealing with an internal threat (like most proponents of this argument presume). Therefore our US government has suddenly decided to become tyrannical. In order to do this in the first place, the potential tyrant must have the support of the majority of our professional armies. Rough Size of US Military: Roughly 2.5 Million Size of US Police Force: Roughly 110,000 Gun Owners: Roughly 75 Million http://www2.fbi.gov... http://www.ehow.com... http://www.justfacts.com... Not all gun owners would revolt, and not the entire military would fire on its own citizens. If I'm not mistaken, our military force is mainly deployed overseas and there are around 4 support units for every fighting unit (airplane fueling, food distribution, ammo manufacturer, etc.) Many of the gun owners also include military and law enforcement. However let's assume just for simplicity that the entire US military and Police force would combat against all the US gun owners. If we say 75 million gun owners vs. 3 million professional police/military soldiers, then the US military would have to kill 25 citizens for every soldier to break even. Is this possible? Probably... However the citizens do not need to be able to defeat the US military, they only need to make it too costly. If the fight is too costly, then the tyrannical government should fall apart from internal strife. Out of Time for additional responses.