Okay, so, I have a fairly lax 'pessimist' attitude towards gun control. I don't know how I feel about the far-Right with guns, but, I honestly don't know how I feel about Anarchists with guns either. I would almost trust Libertarians with guns more than Anarchists and I've known some pretty irresponsible Libertarians. That aside, from what I can glean, the general consensus seems to be in favor of armament, but, against adventurist terrorism. The consensus seems to be that some sort of insurrection will lead to revolution. Do revolutionaries simply advocate arming themselves in anticipation of spontaneous revolution? I would be less opposed to this than you might expect, but, ultimately against it as I think that armament provides for the justification of seizures aside from that I am just simply against violent revolution. Also, if that the military decides not to fire upon civillians is really, as Endnotes argues, the "sine qua non" of any revolutionary project, why wage violent revolution at all?
i like dot's answer below.