Not that I think I can make a dent in your dogma, but I shall reply to one of your initial statements:
Since I can think of no logical opposition to gun registration from a pure crime/self-defense perspective.
Besides being not only an incomplete sentence, but an incomplete paragraph, your logic itself appears to be incomplete. I suppose we should consider it lucky you don't teach grammar.
Nevertheless, here is a logical argument in opposition to gun registration: it serves no function in detering crime, because criminals don't use duly registered firearms. It does serve as a deterrent to self-defense by making gun ownership increasingly more costly and onerous. It punishes the law abiding and fails to punish the criminals. It has also been historically a first step that governments use in gun seizure from their citizens.
I teach american government! The constitution of course only has power when it is interpreted and implemented by the Court. The court doesn't appear to share the NRA's veiw on the second ammendment at this time. So to claim I am in error is to only reveal an alarming lack of attention on your part.
If you're an American Government teacher, I hope it isn't in my school district.
The Constitution derives its power from the consent of the governed. I believe that President Jackson had a comment regarding the Court's power to enforce anything. Furthermore, I'd be willing to wager that the people on this thread know far more about court rulings on gun issues than you apparently do. The SCOTUS has not made any rulings on the 2A since the Thirties, and the current rulings of lesser Circuit Courts are in direct disagreement.