That's not entirely correct Sew and the difference is significant.
The only purpose for the 2nd Amendment is so the citizenry of the US could stand against their own oppressive government should it turn against them the way England had just done. The colonies had no professional military because it wasn't allowed to. Those who fought in the Revolutionary War used their own weapons for the most part, certainly in the beginning, and they were roughly equal to what the British soldiers had.
Correct, and they all had single shot, manually loaded firearms.Here's the critical point. Look at some nations today and in the recent past who oppress their citizens. Look at the left leaning regimes first. Nazi Germany, Communist China, Vietnam and modern day North Korea. Now look at right leading mostly theocracies, Saudi Arabia is perfect example. They controll the military and all weapons.
The US could never turn into North Korea or Saudi Arriba. If our government turned strongly left or right and began the extreme persecutions we see in these nations, we have the ability to fight back.
And if you don’t think a citizenry armed with civilian weapons can turn back government troops, I’d ask you to recall Afghanistan repealed both the Soviet Union and the US. In fact, our original Revolution was another example.
LOL - oh boy web... just how long are your arms to reach that far??? Seems you may need to brush up on your knowledge (lack thereof) of what happened (and what's happening currently) in Afghanistan. 
This is why we have a 2nd Amendment. For all our faults, it would be very, very difficult for our government to turn us into North Korea. We’d fight back.
OK - so, if we needed to "fight back" - as it stands today, there are enough guns in private hands to arm every single citizen (including children!). The argument could be made that that's enough... right?
Yes, it's difficult. Yes, there are abuses. But look at our freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches. These freedoms come at a much higher cost than the 2nd Amendment and we would never consider yielding those.
What do you mean by "higher cost"? My son, my brother, my father-in-law, my best friend all served to protect the entire Constitution. There is not any one that is a "higher cost" than the others.Actually, we are heading down a dangerous road by allowing Twitter and Facebook to determine what is hate speech but that's another topic.
It's hard to be an American. It will be even harder in the future because the appeal to give up freedoms for what we think is peace and security will become even stronger. We need to resist that urge.
Pages: 
