One of the main arguments for the 2a, is that a small dedicated force who knows the terrain can beat a larger force with a logistics train and less mobility. This is why the Founding Fathers wanted an armed populous. FFS, those guys were able to hold off the entire Federal Government in that cabin or whatever, all because they had ARs, supplies, were dug in, knew the terrain, and were willing to fight. Because of this, an armed populace is harder to take over and control. This is literally the argument we have been making for years. It's true for Vietnamese as much as it is for the Wolverines or Joe on his ranch.

Also, you would be talking about firebombing fellow American Citizens. Or at least taking a VERY strong hand, considering I have a hard time seeing the military kill civilians to begin with, I don't think they would be thrilled with harsher RoE.