Along those lines, Jeff Snyder wrote pretty much the same thing in his 1993 essay, A Nation Of Cowards
https://jim.com/cowards.htm Very important reading. Please read it if you haven't already.
I agree, most gun owners, faced with the choice of killing the 26-year-old female rookie police officer at the random gun checkpoint, and then getting killed soon after, would choose to surrender rather than fight. But a few would fight. (Mostly those with the least to lose, as in, no spouses and children.) The author posits 1%. One percent of gun owners is a lot of gun owners willing to kill and die. Say 100 million gun owners? One percent is one million. If each hardcase killed one cop or soldier on average before being killed, a million dead cops and soldiers would be momentous, no? So, maybe it's only 1/10th of one percent, 100,000 dead cops and soldiers. That is still a whole lot.
The author rightly makes the point that the core purpose of the Second Amendment is to give The People the means to kill American soldiers (and cops by extension, although there were no cops back then). Scalia missed this in his Heller opinion, in which he wrote that self-defense against criminal attack is the core purpose of the Second Amendment. The Founders had not just finished defending themselves against home invasions by burglars and druggies. They had just finished killing redcoats, who were, we should remember, their own countrymen -- British killing British. That's what revolutions are about -- killing your own friends, co-workers, and even relatives. That's why we want so much to avoid revolutions and civil wars. That's why revolutions and civil wars happen so rarely. But, they do happen.
