Current & future validity of the 2nd amendment to the U.S. constitution

However these too battles were not won with cutting edge technology for the time and was instead won with regular fire arms I can not think of a single instance when a private citizen owned a more advanced weapon such as a cannon or weapon above the grade of a small arm. Thus I see little reason that the common people should given access to modern heavy weaponry when back in the beginning of US history when the 2nd Amendment was used heavy weaponry still seemed out of reach of the private citizen. Also all the numbers that you throw out for gun ownership is interesting but yet again does not protect America from invasion for we are not anywhere close to under threat of invasion. And in relation to the number of Americans with fire arms the statistic is in relation to how close the investigators can get to a country. To think that we have more guns than some third world countries I find highly unlike. Yes I know what is says on Wikipedia but do you really think they go up to every child soldier to ask if they have a gun. And in relation to this group rebelling than we might want our military to not be the most sophisticated in the world for any rebellion that you suggest due to the elite training and technology of the Military. Just giving sophisticated military tech to civilians wold not make them soldiers any more than having a shotgun makes them hunters. You could also make the argument that their are over 20 million former vets that could operate such vehicles and weaponry in times of open rebellion. However, would you really want to put yet another financial burden on our veterans by saying that they need to be ready for a open rebellion at any moment. On the logistical problem I'm not sure you quite understand how much logistics goes into running a army but the ammunition problem would be the tip of the iceberg with shortages of every type of good imaginable occurring in a army tat could be up to 75 million strong even if it was only 25 of even just 5 million the logistical issues for a undisciplined a non uniform army would be insane. Also I have a feeling that the influx of military technology may actually be detrimental to the military strategy of any rebellion for over the past 150 years it has been shown that America really can't effectively fight against guerrilla warfare however given a influx of weaponry the rebels my think they could stand u the the US in a pitched battle a mistake that the Viet Cong paid dearly for in the Tet offensive And for your idea to give Jim Bob explosives ( sorry for not telling you to call the office that is what I did) goes against your premise of your entire argument of stopping tyranny. For as far as I'm aware this rebellion is to stop a government from abusing the people. If you allow people to buy nuclear weapons whats to stop them from pulling an evil villain and hold the world ransom for 1 million dollars or something much worse thus I feel that your legalization of extreme armaments would put the fate of America into less hands not more. And to counter act your last three paragraphs I must beseech you to closely read this paragraph for it entirely summarizes why I don't think the 2nd amendment is applicable i modern day society m also well aware of what the military technology that was available to the founding fathers as well as their logistical restraints which stopped them from fielding a larger army thus the reason why the second amendment for the formation of state militias was popular. However, the original framers ideas would not resonate in today's society. For try explaining to James Madison that the shot heard around the world would not just be heard around the world but would also kill every living thing on it. Try explaining to George Washington that America is the worlds only true military superpower in the world. These new realities don't at all match the founders of America's belief for America because America has always been in flux and is still eve now changing with society. thus the ideas of modern weaponry and armament. Ides that had not existed in 1776 it is hard to try and base your ideology you know is based of something that does not necessarily apply to current technology for as I have stated before the amendments of the constitution were not written in stone and were made to amend to american life as it changed and that is truly why our constitution has survived because it is adaptive to change as it must continue to be if America is to continue to thrive.