barn-
Could go either way.
Think they have stripped the Militia out of the citizens over the years and replaced it with the state / federal reserves. My vision of it is every individual being
responsible enough about their citizenship, to recognize that our citizenship comes at a price, and that price is keeping at least one functional small arm, and being proficient in it. That's a debate for another day and place though. I will say I'm a fan of the Swiss model.
So, are we, or were we, either is equally valid if you argue from a given context.
NFA may be OK for awhile and I wouldn't worry about two things; number of guns in trusts, and inheritance.
The problem with corporate trusts, which so many people seem to use for NFA ownership these days, is simple -
corporations do not have the same rights and protections, under law, that peoplehave. Thus, it's entirely possible for corporate trusts ownership of NFA items to get wiped out with one stroke of the pen.
The other is inheritance. YOU have a right to keep what you own or to be justly compensated if ownership is lost due to government action or law. Nothing truly protects your ability to inherit this property to heirs. There is a lot of case law that protects most inheritance and estates, but I'm not even remotely close to being up to current on probate law. If they ever want to truly ban them, they *could* conceivably limit ownership to people already ON the NFA register.
It's like that in Canada, from my understanding, and eventually - if I recall the situation correctly - one guy will eventually "own" all of the full auto weapons in the country, and when he dies, they will all be forfeit to the state.
I could be remembering wrong, don't have the best recollection - think the gray hairs suck brain cells out of your head...