Non-Inflammatory Note On Gun Control

For some reason, my mind keeps going over this particular topic.
Automatic weapons were outlawed for the reasoning that a hunter does not need that much firepower and that the majority of people who would use said weapon would use it against police force. Now I do admit that this is a very serious subject, and that criminals should not have access to automatic weapons to use against our police force.

But I think about why we have the right to bear arms in the first place, it's for people to defend themselves incase of a revolt or incase of an invasion. I admit that there are many fine rifles and handguns available to the public, but in the situation between perhaps an M16 versus a .45 Ruger or a 30.06, I'm afraid that the M16 would surpass both weapons considerably well.

So if there were to be a revolution against the U.S. Government, it would be squashed, quite easily because of the armed soldiers being equipped with said M16. However the only reason there would be a revolt against the U.S. Government is if perhaps there was someone doing something unconstitutional without a check or a kind of balance against it. But the reason for the revolution would have better be a very good one.

In this situation, I think it'd be much better for the public to have access to automatic weapons. Granted that there would likely to be branches of the military that would have difficulty keeping their own troops in-line giving that it would be a very good reason for revolt, but it does seem quite unfair.

I feel that automatic weapons should be available to the public, but with extreme guards in place to keep people who might use them for crime to get them.