If by "dispose of it" you mean the 2nd ammendment, then your hypothetical is nonsensical because no branch of government can unilaterally change the constitution, so who cares?
By "dispose of" I mean disposing of the Fed because they became too tyrannical. Violating the second amendment might be one reason, yes.
Question along the same lines; Isn't the fact that a citizen can't own an F-15 or a tactical nuke an infringement of our second amendment rights?
During the time it was written the equivalent of billionaires in those times could own fleets of armed vessels and train and equip their men with weapons, so it is arguable that the founding fathers would not put restrictions on F-15s.
In regards to nuclear weapons, this may fall outside of the scope of what the framers envisioned. The second amendment gave the public the ability to act as a military power against a tyrannical government. But nuclear weapons fall outside of the classification of normal arms, as even the militaries of foreign countries are prohibited by international regulations from building and possessing nuclear weapons beyond the countries which already had them, since their proliferation could cause nuclear winter and human extinction. The usage of nuclear weapons against human targets is also tantamount to genocide, even if used solely against military targets, due to atmospheric and land-based radioactive effect, would provoke an international response, and is extremely taboo.
Nuclear weapons are not necessary to wage a serious war, so this limitation is generally accepted by the militaries of the world, and semi-successful efforts have been underway for the eventual mutual denuclearization of existing nuclear powers.