What I meant was that no causality has been established between what Hamilton thought and what subsequently did or not did not happen. To suppose that causality nonetheless exists is ideological.
One typically has to posess at least a moderate level of intelligence in order to reach a position of considerable power within the federal government. Surely someone who is intelligent enough to reach a position within the government that gives them enough power to attempt to become a tyrant would also be smart enough to realize the the military force at his disposal is still insufficient to control the people against their will. Knowing this, why would he go to the trouble, and subject himself to the risk, of attempting such a scheme when it is doomed to failure? Throughout our history, the only times the U.S. Government has been able to carry out tyrannical acts have been when it had the support of the majority of the people. Also, historically, disarmament of their victims is often one of the first courses of action taken by tyrants. Hitler and Stalin, while evil and most likely insane, were not stupid. They both knew that they had to strip their people of their rights (including the right to arms) to ensure that their despotism could not be opposed, and thus the removal of the people's rights was one of the first courses of action taken by both tyrants.