No, that is not true. Each state writes it's own gun laws. Some states' constitutions (I believe six of them) say nothing about the right to keep and bear arms. In my state, I need a Firearm Owner's Identification card, issues by the Illinois State Police Department, in order to own a firearm or even to purchase ammunition. Not true in your state, I bet.
Now, ready for this? If a state wishes to restrict or ban any type of gun, they may do so if it isn't against their state constitution. How can this be?
When the second amendment was written, to whom did it apply? Well, if you remember your history, the Constitution and the BOR was written to restrict the newly formed federal government. Each state already had their own constitutions.
The second amendment said that the federal government shall not infringe the RKBA. Did you ever wonder how a city like New York or LA or Chicago can ban guns? I don't mean concealed carry -- I mean you are not allowed to possess or own a gun in those cities.
"Another important factor in the small arms-control debate is federalism. Like all the other Bill of Rights Amendments, the Second Amendment was originally added to the Constitution to limit the power of the federal government only. Both the 1876 decision of United States v. Cruikshank and the 1886 decision of Presser v. Illinois recognized this and explicitly stated the Second Amendment limits the power of the federal government only".
"The basic liberties of the Bill of Rights did not become applicable to the states until after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. Among other things, the Fourteenth Amendment prohibited the states from depriving "any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Through a tortuous, decades-long process, the Court eventually adopted the view that certain fundamental liberties in the Bill of Rights could be incorporated through the due process clause and turned into limits against the power of the states also. In separate decisions, the right of free speech, the right to freely exercise one's religion, the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and so on, were made applicable to the states by the Justices".
"The Second Amendment right to bear arms, however, has never been incorporated by the Court into the Fourteenth Amendment. The result is that today the Second Amendment, whatever it may mean, operates to restrict only the power of the federal government. The states remain unfettered by the Amendment's limitations. They remain essentially free to regulate arms and the right to bear them as they choose, in the absence of strictures in their own state constitutions and laws."
-- Alain Sanders, timemagazine.com
I am pro-gun. But I bring this up so you realize just where the problem lies.
The Federal government requires you to pass a background check. Let me say that again as you seem to not understand that. The Federal government demands! and requires! that you pass a background check before you are allowed to purchase a gun from a dealer. The Federal government is not the state. If you do not pass, the Federal Government will not let you but it.
As I said previously, you can still buy one from an individual but even that is regulated by the Federal Government. You cannon buy a handgun from your cousin in another state because of Fedral law.
Of course I know the original BOR was put there as a check on the Federal Government. And you know that is no longer the case. Besides the second amendment makes it clear that possessing arms is a right, not something granted by the federal or for that matter the state government.