I don't think a rational debate on gun control is currently possible in the United States

[NYC_SKP]

21. A great body of empirical data exists now, it's not even about Constitutional interpretation.

Without going into too much detail, evidence is adequate to prove the usefulness of personal firearms in preventing crime, protecting oneself and in being able to assist authorities in some circumstances.

Further, there are several historic precedents for governments that overstep and citizens that are able to make corrections, often without any violence.

Thus, I think your premise and your terms don't really invite an even handed dialogue.

"right to violently overthrow the United States government", for example, is a non starter.

Should such a time come that a government is so corrupt that some form of revolution is inevitable, one can expect a large portion of government troops to defect to the side of the revolutionaries.

When that time comes for other countries but no relief is found, it tends to be where personal firearm ownership has previously been banned outright.

See North Korea.

We don't want that, we don't want a police state or a military state where only the police and military have guns, yet we seem to be headed there.