[Rockingham]

A telephone call, email, or Internet web page may go through a single state or a dozen states. Without expert investigation and access to restricted and ephemeral information, it is impossible to tell.

In your view of the commerce clause, could a state tax or regulate the charges and terms of intrastate only telephone calls, emails, and web postings? How could one hope to tell if such a law was being adhered to when there are billions or trillions of telephone calls, web pages, emails, and similar communications a year?

Similar problems develop with almost any item or service in commerce today. Unless there is a uniform national standard, interstate commerce in it is burdened and beset with operational complications that make trade in it impossible or much more expensive.

Consequently, the trend of modern business is to prefer one national standard and authority instead of fifty or more different ones. The public benefits because goods and services cost less and are of higher quality and more available. Similarly, states benefit because their economies are larger and more robust.

As for your gun, it was almost certainly manufactured out of state. Hence, the gun itself is within the definition of interstate commerce and would be under a strict sense of the commerce clause; and the manufacturer likely wants the federal government to exercise the commerce clause power to block a large class of gun liability tort claims.

Take that gun near a school though, and I will agree that is not a matter for the federal commerce clause because it falls within the traditional concept of state and local police powers.

[MileHi]

As for your gun, it was almost certainly manufactured out of state. Hence, the gun itself is within the definition of interstate commerce and would be under a strict sense of the commerce clause

HorseHillery. According to this case:

U.S. Supreme Court A.L.A. SCHECHTER POULTRY CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES, 295 U.S. 495 (1935)

the Supreme Court said that once the goods arrived in the destination state, the commerce was no longer interstate.Of course the court contradicted itself a couple years later to facilitate FDRs power grab and socialization of this country.Seems theose justices wanted to retain their seat at the table of power.

If a gun, sold new in a given state 30 years ago, is resold today in the same state, how is it still "in interstate commerce"?

[Know your rights]

the trend of modern business is to prefer one national standard and authority instead of fifty or more different ones.

I care less about what modern business prefers than what the Constitution demands ... but then, I'm a conservative.