I see that my thread was downvoted, so I'll respond with this. In my opinion it was a very keen observation on which the above excerpt is based. That is that

I see that my thread was downvoted, so I'll respond with this. In my opinion it was a very keen observation on which the above excerpt is based. That is that people on equal footing are far more likely to engage to resolve disputes in a civil manner than those where one group is sufficiently and strategically in a favorable position. Take any sufficiently one-sided argument anywhere in the news and show me where the weaker group prevailed? To draw a parallel to technology. We don't architect our systems for the best case scenario. For critical infrastructure we plan for the worst and hope for the best. I think that gets to the essence of the above interpretation of 2nd amendment. I think we can draw a parallel to real world and the architecture of our government. For critical infrastructure of our government, where basic human rights are at stake, it behooves us to plan for the worst and hope for the best.