That wasn't the question I asked. Let me repeat: Can you guarantee that NICS will never be used to deliberately abridge the RKBA of free people who are not even alleged--much less proven--to have committed any crime?
To what extent should citizens be expected to cooperate if the government decides to illegitimately abridge someone's RKBA?
Certainly not, because I'm sure that it does now. I've heard more than one first-hand story of a mistaken NICS denial based upon the law-abiding buyer having a common first name shared with a prohibited person in the same ZIP code.
(I'm sorry, I missed answering this question.)
I think we're still beholden to following an unconstitutional law until it's struck down by the courts or repealed by the legislature.
With McDonald and Heller, we now have a standard on what level of scrutiny measures RKBA cases, with the US Supreme Court holding that a 'Rational Basis' is insufficient.
If you're hoping for something to happen to NICS, I think that the best thing would be for SCOTUS to strike it down if you can satisfactorily prove that it is abridging RKBA by accident (as in the case of the one I mentioned) or deliberately, like how you fear that it could be nefariously used.
That doesn't necessarily mean NICS would disappear, but there could be a ruling that forces the Federal government to adhere to former Atty General Ashcroft's measure to prove the regularly scheduled elimination of archived NICS requests once and for all.
Tell me the attorney for a reputable aggrieved recipient to whom I can send a donation for this cause. I hope it's Alan Gura warming up in the bullpen again.