Fernando, I love your perspective on our Second Amendment! You make sound points and your logic is better than some of our own elected representatives in congress. To add a little background to the debate, I submit evidence from The Federalist Papers, by James Madison:

"Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops."

2. "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 Federalist Papers can be looked at as the logic and reasoning behind much of the U.S. Constitution. Here, Madison clearly states that an armed citizenry is the best bulwark against tyrannical central government. Furthermore, he introduces the fact that strong local governments lead by those held in public trust would be the commanders of such private citizens were they to band together as militia to repel tyrannical forces. In is indisputable that the 2nd Amendment grants a private citizen the unfettered right to own firearms and also to use them against a tyrannical force.

p.s. Fernando, I love Fallout Boy in the background. Excited about Fallout: New Vegas???

Obviously Madison didn't anticipate the govt having nukes, sound weapons, microwave torpedos, and other nifty stuff that allow it to wipe out whole cities that are rebelling in one shot. Back then, the army had rifles, the militia had muskets. Not too big of a difference. Today, the militia would march on Washington with AKs, and they'd fly a microwave torpedo over them, then send cleanup crews to dispose of the charred, melted hunks. Supposedly they've deployed microwave weapons in Iraq. They HAVE used depleted uranium in Iraq, and soundweapons in the US. With the army having all sorts of exotic weapons to kill tons of people at once, the little pea shooters that the people have are useless. Maybe that's why Obama didn't bother renewing the assault weapon ban.

While the Federal arsenal is quite considerable, the manpower that imploys said arsenal is the core to its success. As a Veteran of Afghanistan and a first-hand observer of the destructive power wielded by the National Command Authority, I can tell you that desertion and mutiny would be prevalent if any conventional weapons were used against the American people, let alone WMD's. Not to say that our Government is not capable at some point of doing so, but they would only have one crack at it.

The movies hype the government's efficiency level on many fronts. A movie like Will Smith's Enemy of the State  wildly exaggerates the Fed's ability to track an individual and implement counter-measures in realtime. If they were that good, 9/11 would have been an impossibility. Other movies like Conspiracy Theory  also highly overrate the Gubment's ability to keep a secret. Those points being made, we are in danger of tyranny, but the machine is NOT well oiled, and certainly not without its great share of hang-ups.

Ironically, the Beauracracy we now despise and lament may be our saving grace should we be forced to affect a rebellion.. Lets hope so!

When all is said and done and written, you only have those rights which you are willing and able to defend.  

Truer words were never spoken.