Earlier quoted context omitted.
This make sense intuitively: governments are better armed than the people (militarized police, military). If guns are used in a conflict between the people and a government, the government will crush the people immediately. On the other hand, enough protests and civil disobedience will disrupt the economy and the functioning of the government to the point they will have to react, or resign. I am not American and have…
>When was the last time a law or policy was successfully fought and turned around in the U.S.? Prohibition Civil rights act Roe v Wade Gay marriage Marijuana legalization
In which of those was the 2nd amendment used?
Having said that, weren't those slow change of the laws? I was thinking more about forceful events like the opposition to the Vietnam war, the yellow jackets in France, or what's going on in Hongkong right now.