This has become quite the talking point with the anti-gun movement.

Unfortunately, the founding fathers didn’t think that way.

James Madison, writing as Publius in Federalist Paper # 46:

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.”

The founding fathers did, in fact, see the militia as a replacement for a standing army by which tyranny was enforced in Britain and Europe. It was to stand as defense of the nation from both internal and external threats.

You’ll note that the federal government did call out the militia to put down a tax revolt by white farmers in 1791 (en.wikipedia.org ) but not in response to even Nat Turner’s Rebellion, the most serious slave uprising in our nation’s history (en.wikipedia.org ). That was handled by local militia.

That the militia turned out to be one of the greatest failures of the Constitution’s experiments in government is rather ironic. However, the 2nd amendment is built on the premise that individuals owning individual weapons would come together in times of emergency, chose their officers & go march to war. To change that will require a change in the amendment itself and that is not likely anytime soon given the polarization of the national discourse in all other areas.