The whole history of restrictions on citizens' ability to possess weapons gives strong evidence that those laws were put in place to help an elite control a much larger peasantry. This was true during the Middle Ages, before the gun was invented, and it is true today. Here are some examples:
About 1600, the the Toyotomi and later Tokogawa Shogunates made possession of swords by any but the Samauri Class illegal. That restricted swords to the nobility and their hired retainers. At that time, the classes were also frozen so that the children of farmers could only be farmers, the children of artisans could only be artisans, and so on.
Both before and after the Civil War, African Americans were forbidden to own guns in both the South and in some Northern states. At first, it was to prevent slave rebellions. Later, it provided safe working conditions for the Ku Klux Klan when they came to brutalize and murder freed slaves. Nominally, the laws after the Civil War required permits from the county sheriff to carry a gun and supposedly applied to both Whites and African Americans. But, it seemed that only whites could qualify for the permits. And, if a white did get caught with a gun and no permit, he would not normally be prosecuted. But, a black would go to prison.
About 1900 or just after, New York passed its infamous Sullivan Law. That law required a police permit to own or carry a pistol. It was sponsored by Timothy Sullivan, who began his career as a thug, paid to beat up voters who opposed the Tammany Hall candidates on election day. He rose to become a leader of the Tammany Hall machine. Around 1900, or so, some voters were tired of being intimidated by Tammany Hall's "shoulder strikers" (paid hoodlums) and armed themselves. They used pistols to fight back. After that, the Sullivan Law was passed, and only people with police permits could carry a pistol. Guess who controlled the police who issued the permits in New York City? That's right--Tammany Hall controlled the police and determined who would get a permit. So, they could once again safely intimidate voters, since only their people had gun permits issued by their tame police.
In 1920, Great Britain passed their National Firearms Act of 1920, severly limiting British gun rights. At the time, it was touted as a measure to control crime. About 80 years later, the British Home Office released documents that showed that the real reason was the fear, by the British government, of a revolution in Great Britain, caused by the economic recession and joblessness that came just after the end of World War I. Also, it was only three years after the Bolshevik Revolution had occurred in Russia, and that also played a part.
Check out history, and you will find many other examples. What this means to us is that, anti-crime propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding, laws restricting the ownership or bearing of arms are much more likely to be designed to solidify the powers of a small elite over a larger peasantry, whom the elite will then exploit for the fun and profit of that elite.
Well said. Your additional historical analysis is right on and sets the 2A/RKBA discussions in a larger than "firearms only" framework.