Lying Scholars Fuel Anti-gun Court Verdicts warns of a significant danger to your rights.
The Second Amendment was clearly meant for individuals to own arms for possible use against the Federal government. Reading the papers of our founding fathers makes that very clear. They had just fought a revolution against an oppressive government and they wanted the citizens to be able to do that again, if the day ever came.
The “collective right” about the National Guard is a fallacy. Get the anti-gunner to agree on the fact that the militia/NG is supposed to overthrow the federal government if necessary, then explain to them the president can federalize the NG with the stroke of a pen. Short of widespread revolt in the ranks, there isn’t anything anybody can do about it. That presents a rather thorny conflict of interest. How can you overthrow an oppressive government if you take your orders from it?
It has also been case law since 1856 that the police cannot be held liable for not protecting citizens. That’s not the job of the police. Personal protection has always rested on the person, and the best and the most effective way to do that is by force of arms. 2,500,000 crimes are prevented every year by armed citizens. in 98% of those cases, once the citizen shows he has a firearm, the bad guys run away. You never hear about this in the news because nothing newsworthy happened. Bad guy threatens, good guy pulls out his weapon, bad guy runs away. End of story.
Don’t expect the police to be there in time if someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night. The best the police can do is gather evidence and catch the criminals for the crimes committed. That will be little comfort to you if it includes your murder.