It doesn't work that way. If armed forces act as a unified structure no one is dumb enough to fight against it and there will be a successful coup but most of the time armed forces also fracture into two or more cliques. In that case, armed militia/people can change the tide of the conflict.
American gun nuts think guns will help them win.
Militias still get basic training.
We seen in history most of the time people who fought back against a unified armed force usually melted away.
Turkiye's independance war was largely successful because we still had our commanders and soldiers intact. Mainly in Istanbul where the Ottoman soldiera got disarmed.
Sultan Vahdettin could not disarm the entire armed forces because most of them just arrived into Turkiye when the allies began the occupation of Istanbul.
There were militias and resistance but the Turkish army was largely the one that did all the heavy fighting led by its commanders like Ataturk, Karabekir and Sakalli Nurettin not only these guys commanded troops in ww1 but also had troops that were battle hardended.
Cerkes etem was a militia leader he no doubt fought well but when Ataturk said all militia groups and irregulars must be disbanded join the armed forces lots of them rebelled and Cerkes etem even teamed up with the Greeks.
Militias should only be used as means of defence not for offense.
