Less than ONE percent of US citizens join the US Military.
The good news is that if there really is THREE PERCENT out there, you've got the military outnumbered three to one. Very good odds for the most part.
However, a well disciplined team will prevail against a disorganized mob.
The founding fathers weren't guerillas in the woods and swamps, they set up a government. Here in Afghanistan the Taliban has often set up "shadow governors" of districts and provinces in the same manner that our Founding Fathers did over two centuries ago.
What that "shadow government" was able to do was gain legitimacy from the people (only really about a third of them, but enough to last on the field of battle against what had been their own countrymen). Had King George any idea of what was going on in Philadelphia he would have marched the Army in and hung them all as traitors.
So what can we learn from this?
First, you need a government to replace the government you want to overthrow. Right now Libya will be going through some intense "growing pains" but one of the first things that they did when the bullets started flying was set up a "transitional council" to deal with the international community. Imagine if there were a power vacuum, the infighting that is going on now is bad enough.
Second, you need to have said government in place before you make any overt moves (or be like Lybia and be able to declare such a government right quick). The transition from monarchy to democracy happened rather smoothly (although the Articles of Confederation were kind of a bust) in the US, but it hasn't been so smooth for countries like France (that whole reign of terror thing).
Third, it is literally a life or death gamble, there are no half measures.
Fourth, it was economics that won the war. England could have sent fleet after fleet after fleet, except it couldn't fund such an endeavor and still guard the home front. It was economics that lost Vietnam and Afghanistan for the Soviets. Not necessarily monetary economics, just that when the accounting was done, the juice wasn't worth the squeeze. In Libya it was NATO spending between one and three billion dollars to give the rebels an air force.
Right now neither the TEA Party nor the Occupy Wall Street movements have set up any "shadow governments" that I can see (doesn't mean they don't exist) so I am not to worried about "revolution" from either of those avenues. And until there is some sort of organization, at best all there is is a disorganized mob. And a well disciplined team will defeat an unorganized mob.
Historically militia movements have been easily penetrated by the FedGov in the US. Historically governments that get oppressive last for decades before collapsing (East Germany, USSR, Yugoslavia). So I don't think that ours is going to get any more free any time soon. There are no consequences to government for becoming increasingly oppressive. When we look at what works in bringing down those regimes it is massive civil disobedience. It is the people withdrawing support. It is much more than three percent. Armed resistance hasn't been the answer (except when backed by powerful international forces) for a long time.
But if massive, passive, civil disobedience fails? Then smart people would form shadow governments, reach out to sympathizers in the International Community, and prepare for the absolute worst in humanity.