Interesting theory. I suspect that "putting down slave revolts" did factor into it. I tend to favor the more conventional wisdom that the more overriding factors for adoption of the Second Amendment included:
*facilitating creation of a militia system
*enabling citizen support of law enforcement
*deterring "tyrannical government" to include having the capacity to engage armed invasion (which - as we all know - DID occur)
*providing the capacity for self-defense
As for the base document to which the Second Amendment is attached, it is well documented that the authors understood that "concessions on slavery" were "the price they had to pay for the support of southern delegates for a strong central government."
The history of slavery and all its convoluted injustices is spread throughout American history. However, I don't buy the Bogus/Alternet contention that its adoption was principally to facilitate slavery by "assur(ing) the Southern states that Congress would not undermine the slave system by using its newly acquired constitutional authority over the militia to disarm the state militia and thereby destroy the South's principal instrument of slave control."
But in any event, we have the Second Amendment with us now, and it is not likely to go away anytime soon. Other than for purely history perspective, it matters little now WHY the Second Amendment was adopted. But for those who love history (I do), Lincoln University has an interesting history of "The Right To Keep and Bear Arms" on their web site at: