[StJacques]

"The NFA is blatantly unConstitutional as it limits private ownership of the very type of arms necessary to formulate a militia unit."

First of all; I'm a little pressed for time, so I'll have to speak off the top of my head here without recourse to documentation to check myself.

I believe the case is English v Texas, which as I recall, was from the 1870's and was reviewed and upheld by the Supreme Court in some later decisions, possibly Miller, which supports the very contention you make. The Texas court found that any arms suitable for militia use could be legally kept and borne by common citizens.

Like I said, I don't have the time to check this, but you might look into it if you're interested.

[Dead Corpse]

Considering the NFA didn't come around until 1934, an 1870's case on the issue would be a little out of place.