In my opinion, AlanF's original original post on this thread was entirely correct. Whether the nastiness of the English was actual or merely perceived, it was the motivation behind the rights guaranteed to citizens under the Bill of Rights. In my research, the one singular document stands out at representing the basis for every freedom guaranteed to citizen's of this country is also one of the least read.
It is the document which sets forth the conditions that laid the entire foundation for the Second Amendment.
http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/arms.html
This documents the reasons for a second amendment to be exactly the reasons stated by AlanF, for a citizenry to be able to always defend itself from governmental oppression, whether that pressure should present internally or externally. Logically carried forward to our day that would mean citizens should be allowed to own the same equipment for defense as that used by the US Government, although I doubt that will ever be a reality again.
On another board a pro-gun control gentleman stated that the idea of the Government siezing the arms of the citizens and forcibly doing them harm never entered into the framers minds. This document, neatly if not succinctly, destroys the legitimacy of any such claims. Not only could they conceive it, they had lived through it. They had seen first hand the abusive and power mad nature of government and tried to provide a means through which grievances could be redressed if the new government ever turned off its ears and heart.
Respectfully,
OldSoul