is a part of the U.S. Constitution/Bill of Rights, limiting the type of gun or the process to own a gun is not.

And therein lies the problem. Where is the line of laws / restrictive executive orders so burdensome that the right to own a gun has been effectively denied? If SCOTUS is stacked with judges who allow executive orders and laws that are so restrictive to remain in force...

What if every gun were to be taxed at the rate of $1000 per year? Yes, you can have as many guns as you want, but the poor are thereby effectively denied ownership. $10,000 per year and the middle class are S.O.L.

What if there is a limit put on the number of guns that you can own? Would 1 gun satisfy the right to own a gun? So you could have a hunting rifle, but then not a handgun for personal protection carry?

What if the manufacture / importation of all ammunition were to be banned? In a few years (decades ) your right to a gun has not been abridged, just not much you can do with it past throwing it at a intruder in your home.

Who sits on the Supreme Court makes a huge difference!

And how are all of the guns over one, and guns with taxes not paid going to be confiscated? Do ya really think they're just going to be turned in voluntarily? Or are "enforcement agents" going to go through every home to search for the untaxed /extra weapons? It's unworkable unless you suspend a few other constitutional rights along the way. Might as well suspend them all for a few years while the country gets cleaned up.

Who sits on the Supreme Court makes a huge difference!

[P.S. Yes I own guns, and Yes I've been robbed at gunpoint several times...Unlike Lochte ]