Oh yeah. People often think that the Second Amendment was granted to the public for the sake of rebellion against an oppressive government, and that the right to bear arms was always meant to be absolute and immune from any regulation. Historically, this is wrong. Gun regulations have been in place for at least as long as gun rights, and certainly longer than either the Bill of Rights or the Declaration of Independence. "Guns Across America " by Robert J Spitzer is an excellent book on the subject. Ive been looking for it but it's lost in the mess that is my tiny cramped apartment. The following is from my (badly written) essay on the subject:

Spitzer states “Americans know that guns and gun possession are as old as America itself. Although important studies have established that gun regulations also existed from early times, few appreciate the extent variety, and breadth of such regulations”.(30) According to Spitzer, gun regulations have been in place since at least 1607, more than a hundred years before the Second Amendment was ever written.(40 Table 2.1). Spitzer explains to us that gun regulation is as old as the United States itself. According to the author,

“The prevailing gun law movement in America in the last three decades towards the relaxing of gun restrictions, as well as concealed carry laws, the the open carry movement, and most recently stand your ground laws, are not a return to the past. They are a refutation of America’s past, a determined march away from America’s gun regulation tradition. And these changes have nothing to do with improving safety or security in society, but they have everything to do with politics”(64).

As for the claim that guns were meant to be a failsafe against the government, these are also misled. The founding fathers were not in favor of rebellion against a representative democracy, they were in favor of rebellion against an absolute monarchy, just as John Locke was. And like John Locke, they believed that forceful rebellion against a representative government was unjust and wrong, which was why George Washington and the vast majority of the people at the time disapproved of the Whiskey Rebellion. After all, you cannot rebel against a government and then claim the rights that that government affords you. Finally, the Constitution defines treason as this "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them". The Constitution itself regards armed rebellion not as necessary, but as treason. The idea that the Founding Fathers and the Constitution advocated armed rebellion against the government is unsubstantiated and has no basis in historical fact.

The current gun debate is a product of a lot of political lobbying, misinformation, and heated rhetoric. The Founding Fathers never advocated for armed rebellion. Americans were historically never averse to gun regulations. There may be arguments for the right to carry assault weapons and the right to rebellion, but neither can be based on some idea that the Second Amendment somehow guarantees them that right. Because that right doesnt exist, and never did.