The lesson I learned from Hong Kong is you will never take the 2nd Amendment from me. Just come and try and take them. Take a cursory glance at what is going on in VA right now to know what is in store for you if you do.
I think that the protestors would lose local and international support the moment they started shooting. Most successful protest movement have tried to stay nonviolent.
We've run this experiment several times and gotten the same result every time. Hence the forever wars. Hillbillies with guns and IDEs have shown to be pretty effective against militaries.
By being willing to take significantly more casualties, usually because the fighters are ideologically motivated. If you want to be a martyr, keep your guns. How much do you want to bet you'll still be around to see that bright future you take up arms for? Or that once you win, the leaders of your rebellion won't toss you out onto the streets? If you want to stay alive, being a refugee is a much better bet.
Even if you are right, that would imply that the US would enter a protacted civil war that would impoverish everyone. I have a feeling popular support would swing away from the millitias very quickly, just how long do you think millenials will survive without their avocados, yoga classes and fair trade locally brewed artisanal beer.
I'm not sure why you started with this. Your odds are way better if it's against your own military, especially in the West. There's going to be a ton of defectors. Have you met anyone from the South? Those same people who are extremely anti government are usually vets. This isn't just speculation either, there's very clear examples.
But something people constantly forget is that you can't rule the dead. People are a resource. You need them to produce your economy, make your food, tax, etc. But there's also an argument here on the converse side, to make your people rich to make your ruling class even richer. But short term thinking...
Just take a look at what is happening in Virginia right now - police and veterans are siding with the militias in opposition to the incoming gun laws. I have a hard time believing that the men and women of the military would side with the government when the orders are to kill your neighbours.
Maybe in a failed state like California or New York, but that's not the entirety of America.
one dude armed with pretty much any portable weapons is not gonna be able to hold out against police for too long. still, you read a lot of stories of one or two armed citizens who can resist arrest in their home for a couple days. in cases where there are more citizens resisting, this can go on a lot longer. the waco siege lasted 51 days. the police literally had to (or maybe just didn't care enough not to) drop bombs on a rowhouse to end the 1985 MOVE standoff.
a bunch of people with rifles inside a building can be pretty hard to deal with if the government isn't willing to level the place. a large scale revolt of armed citizens could never "win" against the us military, but the conflict wouldn't leave much left worth controlling.
decisions are made in the margins. it is much less risky for a government to impose unpopular laws on an unarmed populace.
It wasn't rice farmers who took on the US. It was the battle hardened vietnamese army who fought imperial japan and then imperial france for many years. Also, even though they ultimately won, they didn't really kick ass. More than 4 million vietnamese died in the vietnam war. Less than 60 thousand americans died. It was one of the most lopsided bloodbaths in human history. That's with tons of sino-soviet military aid to the "rice farmers".
I don't agree with your premise, but for the sake of argument let's say that you're right and armed civilians have no chance of winning against an organized state military.
Don't people have the right to die trying to win their freedom?