Gun worshipers, what is the likelihood that you will one day pick up arms and stop Obama's tyranny?

[Pragmatism Please]

Zero
Can't stop what doesn't exist.


EDIT
You know, protecting oneself from a tyrannical government with guns isn't quite the same thing in 2013 as it was in 1789. Back then, everyone, government and citizen, was making bullets one-by-one right inside their Flintlock.


EDIT2
The Tramp:
It's not that we can't stop a tyrannical government. I just don't think guns would play much of a role. I know the opinion journalists on TV and the shock jocks on radio think we're in the middle of a tyranny right now but I don't see it. I see a Democrat in the White House and I see through Republican eyes. If President Obama tries to stay in office past January 2017, I'll be looking to act in our country's defense.

EDIT3
The Tramp:
You're putting words in my mouth, again. Please stop jumping to conclusions and read the written word. I don't generally nest secret meanings in what I write. I said I don't see our current government as tyrannical. That doesn't mean I'm happy with things that have been done. I've been alive since Eisenhower and I'm still waiting for an administration that does exactly what I want. And yes, I see the world through Republican eyes but not tea party Republican. More like Ike and Nixon along with some of Reagan. Bush 43 was a joke and the tea party is nothing more than idiology-crazed corporate lap dogs--easily managed by their masters. I could change my voter registration but it wouldn't change the way I view the world.

EDIT4
The Tramp:
Tyranny:
American Heritage - 1. A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.
2. The office, authority, or jurisdiction of an absolute ruler.
3. Absolute power, especially when exercised unjustly or cruelly.
Oxford English Advanced - a person who has complete power in a country and uses it in a cruel and unfair way
Merriam Webster - a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler
Collins - government by a tyrant or tyrants; despotism
Cambridge Dictionary - unlimited authority or use of power, or a government which exercises such power without any control or limits

When I hear or think about tyranny, I think of kings and dictators, or elected leaders who make themselves kings or dictators. Not Democrats who don't share my ideology. They are Democrats - large central government, big spending, lots of social programs.

Clinton signed Gramm-Leach-Bliley cancelling 70 years of Glass-Stegall, then the Securities Modernization Act.
He had to.
China was investing all their Walmart/Target money buying US Treasuries. We needed to move them into some other safe investment because the upward pressure they were putting on our Treasuries market was threatening to cause inflation. Hence, legislation allowing Mortgage Backed Securities and Colateralized Debt Obligations, or more specifically Colateralized Mortgage Obligations was passed. All to grease the wheels of Chinese investment in our residential real estate market. We want them to invest here, right? Practical, not tyrannical.
Bush bailed out the banks. He had to. We tried it the other way in '29 and people DID starve to death. Was there ever a time during this recession you couldn't buy milk at the corner market? We just went through a walk in the park by comparison, wholly because we bailed out the banks (and AIG, the king of Swaps.)
Bailing out banks kept the recession from becoming another global depression, not tyranny.

Lobbyists getting special treatment. Sure, I hate it too but when has it been any different?

Income tax rates rose to 94% in the mid 1940s and didn't drop below 70% until 1981. No one called that tyranny.

Unwarranted wire taps, USAPATRIOT Act, the NDAA add-on? Those definitely have the potential to be used by a tyrant in ways that would cause a revolt but at present, we don't have a tyrant.

People bought houses way above their means. There was way, way too much money available for mortgages, due to the rapid growth of China and their insistance on only investing in the US. We never bailed out people who overbought before but this time we did provide some lackluster help to some--too little and often too late. We should have bought those houses off the banks at face value and held them until the market recovered, letting people make payments they could afford until someone would buy the house. Our economy would have recovered much more quickly and we would have not added to the debt when the inventory was finally liquidated. We could have held them at near zero interest and watched the economy soar. Doing something else was a judgment call between the White House and Congress, not tyranny.

You share your view on "tyranny" with Fox News, AM radio shock jocks and the people who follow them. No where else, except maybe the tea party freak show, does anyone call our government tyrannical.