You forgot #4, annoy jcwit because he doesnt agree.
I agree with shephard19, as we "are" the militia, or at least we are supposed to be, although I seriously doubt we would ever be allowed to act in that capacity these days.
Since at the time the original document was written (not that it seems to mean much these days), the Brown Bess was basically the military arm of the time, then today, there should be an M4 (as well as anything else they feel they need) in the hands of, or at least available to, every able bodied person in this country, and without any restriction.
Technically, the '34 act was lawful, but at the same time, an end run around the Constitution. They simply taxed the guns out of the average person of the times hands with a $200 tax. The '68 and '86 bans took things into the realm of being unconstitutional by restricting and prohibiting the weapons, basically outright.
Whats the difference in a gun thats already in the registry and one that is not, that you simply want to pay the tax on? Why cant you pay your tax and possess the gun? You'd think with the state of things, the government could use all the money it can collect.
The whole purpose of this is control, and nothing more.
I have to wonder why "opening a can of worms" or "stirring the pot" in respect to this is a bad thing. Seems they are valid questions that need addressed.
Then again, I think they have a ball game on TV and beer's on sale again.