Never understood this argument. It's almost like, in a country where there are more guns than people, those that go against the will of these gun owners might need some protection from them.

But that's beside the point. The main issue here is your casual statement about "civil disarmament." It's utter nonsense. There are no serious calls for the populace to disarm. There ARE some who wish there to be stricter gun regulations, such as a national registry or doing something to keep firearms out of the hands of those with mental illnesses.

I'm a gun owner, more than one. I have a plinker rifle that I love to play with, a bush rifle passed down through my family and a .45 that's fun to shoot and keeps me feeling secure in my home. This argument is still bad.

the political class & the elites would always prefer an unarmed populace.
gives them a little more leeway to steal & fuck everything up.

They're generally guarded by well trained law enforcement officers, not everyday morons with guns.

Because the politicians in favor of gun control are often targeted by those with guns…