This often goes missed when gun owners are criticised for saying that guns are useful in a revolt. The point isn't to win against a tyrannical government, it's

This often goes missed when gun owners are criticised for saying that guns are useful in a revolt. The point isn't to win against a tyrannical government, it's to force said regime's hand into a position where they either give up or commit an atrocity that hastens their demise and weakens their mandate. Vietnam and Iraq are two standout examples of weapons being useful to resist a powerful occupier. They never actually defeated the US, they were just a huge pain in the ass until the US finally gave up and left.