I ask one question of those of you who believe that the founders' intent with the 2nd Amendment was to allow the people to violently overthrow their own government. Why didn't they just come out and say that? "As it may become necessary for The People to overthrow their own government, the right of The People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." They could have, right? But they didn't. Why? How about because that wasn't their intent?What they DID say was "A well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free State, The right of the people ... " For the security OF the State. Not FROM the State. If 'The People,' collectively, want to 'alter or abolish' their government, they have that power. They won't need guns. Assuming, that is, that it really IS 'The People,' and not a handful of discontented individuals. Right?