That's one of the best overall reasons to preserve gun ownership rights for private citizens. A lot of people tend to think it can never ever be their own government that can one day suddenly go rouge on its citizenry no matter where a persons happens to live and resides. It sounds conspiratorial on the surface and for the most part it may be the case, but it only takes that one particular person or persons to ascend to power to change a country's benevolence over to sheer madness and terror.
OTOH, I think it's a mistake to believe that being armed makes a person free.
I think there's real danger in the idea that the right to bear arms guarantees the other freedoms. IMO, it can create a situation where freedom can be infringed.
The things that actually guarantee freedom, e.g. active participation in a democratic government and vigilant oversight of elected officials, are a lot of work. I think the notion that merely owning a firearm or two can be a substitute for doing all the "heavy lifting" required for a functional democracy is rather dangerous. It can create a situation where a person's freedoms have been completely undermined, but because they've still got ahold of their guns, they don't bother to notice.
Remember the old expression "the price of democracy is eternal vigilance." That's all there is to it; there's no caveat on it that says
"... unless you're packing heat."
Personally, I'm okay with people owning guns as long as they do it safely. Handguns... not so much, but I don't really want to go into that here. However, I don't think it's a good idea for a person to see his gun as some sort of guarantee that his rights are protected. That's a recipe for disaster.