@Smokin Joe
I'm not @Jazzhead, but I would imagine Switzerland and Israel would count. Also Canada, though it's a provincial rather than national registry.
In switzerland and Israel, the countries have a far more integral military than the USA. The arms are combat issue weapons. Ordinary hunting rifles and such (which are not full-auto capable) are in private hands and frequently not registered in Swizerland. I can't speak to the rules in Israel.
In Canada, a long gun registry was attempted. After years of wholesale noncompliance, enormous cost overruns, and only a small fraction of those guns registered (Canadians IGNORED the law, en masse and refused to comply) the government threw in the towel and repealed the law.
Those countries do not have our 2nd Amendment, nor is their history comparable to our own in the sense that our country won its independence with the very privately owned arms our 2nd Amendment protects the right to own--arms as capable as those in the hands of any soldier in the world, or more so.
The list of places which have had registration which led to or facilitated confiscation is long, including such totalitarian notables as Imperial Japan, China, Russia, all of the East Bloc nations under communism, England, Australia, Germany (which also enabled the Nazi regime), and even California, New York and others.
With such an overwhelming number of instances where registration has led to confiscation, and so few where it has not (yet), I am not willing to trust my property nor my country (not to mention my liberty) to the good nature of those in office. We have seen how much can change in a few years just recently, from social experimentation in the military to the sweeping changes which left many Americans who had had health insurance without (I am one of those whose health insurance no longer exists--the company stopped offering it.), along with other changes which I find deleterious in a mere 8 years.
An old rule is that one never grants power or authority to a governmental entity which has the potential to be used for ill, because it is almost guaranteed it will be. So while some advocate registration, I WILL NOT COMPLY, and I know many others who will not either. This widespread civil disobedience (by many of the 80 million firearm owners in the US) can be easily avoided, along with the Wacos and other inevitable incidents perpetrated by those seeking to 'make examples' to cow others into compliance.
Just say no. No registration scheme, follow the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and leave the tens of millions of currently law abiding gun owners alone--OR--create the largest criminal class in the nation's history and incite or produce incidents which will inevitably lead to bloodshed.
I find it almost amusing that some would have US register our weapons when those from the last administration who facillitated the sale (actually, ordered those sales to go through) of firearms to known straw buyers for Cartels, street gangs, and other criminal enterprises, under the guise of running a 'sting' operation when there was NO CONCEIVABLE WAY those weapons would ever be recovered, except at future crime scenes, remain unmolested.
Clean up the scumbags who, as members of our own government, and members of 'law enforcement' who would be tasked with imposing this type of scheme on Americans first. Then we can have this conversation again. (The answers won't change, but we can talk).
To what purpose would the Government create an entire class of criminals, knowing full well there will be widespread noncompliance, when it has plenty of things on its own plate? Is this a distraction? Let''s get back to the Border, to the Wall, to prosecution of those who acted illegally under color of law or broke their oaths of office to do deals with Iran and other hostile powers, just for starters. There are far more important fish to fry, rather than try to incite domestic violence and hostility between law enforcement and those who should be able to support it rather than end up in conflict.
No way 5 million AR-15s (alone) have been purchased, often at great relative expense, by individuals for those same individuals to meekly turn around and give up their property. That, mind you is just one of the over 100 flavors of firearms that the 'assault weapon bans' have sought to remove from gun cabinets across the USA, That does not count those built from partly finished receivers, nor other homemade guns, some of which are quite sophisticated. If you consider Pakistanis working with rudimentary tools can build a copy of any firearm made in the world, imagine what Americans can do with some engineering know-how and some really decent power tools in a home shop. Then, too, receivers have been 3D printed using that technology. In other words, you are not going to be able to register them all (an estimated 9 firearms for every 10 people in the US), you can't track them all, you can't keep track of those being made privately, and any attempt to do so will brutally violate all the other civil rights enumerated in the Constitution. So, in a word, NO.
Consider the Canadians projected a 2 million dollar cost to register all long guns in the nation, and spent 1 Billion before giving up, imagine the cost overruns for such a scheme here, with likely even less success.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2013/01/22/canada-tried-registering-long-guns-and-gave-up/#419f26bd5a1b
