but most Americans would line up like sheep and accept whatever was requested or demanded believing the government ultimately has the People's best interests at heart.
Like they do when it comes to recreational drugs?
(this is a serious question)
While there are huge differences in the two issues, there are some similarities.
One of those similarities is that our govt justifies certain drugs/plants/etc. as illegal because of the "harm" they do to users and through the users actions or inactions, to the public in general.
Essentially the same argument is being used to justify making gun ownership illegal. Because of the "harm" they cause.
Now, while, going by numbers alone, you probably would get "most" Americans to line up if they passed a "softly enforced" ban on guns. (softly enforced meaning no house to house searches, etc.)
But unlike the issue of illegal drugs (where the only justification for breaking those laws is "because you want to"), firearms have both a real world justification (saving your life in a worst case scenario), and we have the Constitutionally enumerated right to own them.
The fatal flaw that keeps gun control laws from working the way their proponents claim they will is the simple fact that only the "law abiding" obey them.
(which, of course, it also true with every law, but the difference is that for most things, most people believe that the consequences of breaking the law are worse than the consequences of obeying it.)
When it comes to guns, I think you will find a lot of people who will obey a confiscation law, partially. Many would turn in guns they know the govt knows they have, and hide those the govt does not know about, against future dire need. They would consider the risk of being caught and punished by the authorities to be less than their risk to life and safety in the event of a criminal attack.
I think it very likely that while there would be a rash of "boating accidents" or "sold em at the last gun show..." there would be a lot stashed, "just in case". So, just passing a law, and waiting won't get ALL the guns out of (otherwise law abiding) private hands. A confiscation law would get a LOT of guns, but not all, and would have a huge number of unintended consequences.
And, of course, this completely leaves out the actual criminal element, and the deranged, who already obey only the laws they find convenient, and who's actions with guns are being used as the justification for taking them away from the rest of us.