"Do you honestly believe the founding fathers encoded violent revolution into BoR?"
Gee, let's look at some facts, shall we?
Fact #1: Most of the same people who passed what we know as the 2nd Amendment, and most of those in the various state legislatures who ratified it, were either leaders of the Revolution or its footsoldiers. In other words, they had participated in a violent revolution against what was, for roughly a century, the legally constituted government of the place where they lived.
Fact #2: The writers of the Constitution were trying to create "a new order for the ages," i.e. a government that would last for many, many generations and which would serve the people - something that had NEVER been done before. They were afraid of the power of a central government, having just witnessed the abuses of such power that were inflicted upon the people here by England. Hence, they devised a government that was intentionally without any powers other than those mentioned specifically, and divided those powers between three competing branches.
Fact #3: Even the safeguards in #2, above, weren't enough for many. They demanded and received assurances that a series of amendments would be drafted and submitted to the states after the government was formed (IF it was formed), the purpose of which would be to specifically protect certain rights for the people.
Fact #4: Among those rights to be protected was the RKBA, which not only was a basic right in and of itself, but one which was instrumental in actually gaining our independence from England (thereby allowing the possibility that the rest of our rights would even have a chance to be codified and protected).
Fact #5: In addition, the possibility that the Constitution itself would fail to protect our rights at some distant, unseen point in the future was one that haunted the Founders. They desperately desired to make sure that the natural human inclination of those in power to increase that power at the expense of those not in power would somehow or other be deterred for as long as possible and, when said deterrence failed, they wanted to be sure that some future generation had - IN ITS HANDS - the means to do that which they, themselves, had just done less than 15 years before.
You are dead wrong. Maybe they didn't say "The People shall have the right to violently overthrow the government" in so many words in the Second Amendment, but the intent is just that - and it is as clear as day to anyone who knows the history of the era.
Oh, BTW, have you ever taken a look at the Declaration of Independence? It is the theory behind the very practical Constitution Here's the relevant portion:
...that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn(sic), that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
?