[Ken H]

Do you think a correct reading of the Constitution allows Congress to use the Commerce Clause to ban assault weapons?

Yes.

OK.

The Commerce Clause has been recognized to be quite powerful and can be used to ban most anything if 1) both houses of Congress choose to do so, 2) the President agrees, 3) the people agree, and 4) the USSC rules a challenge to it constitutional.

You have stated your belief that the Second Amendment means that the RKBA shall not be infringed by the Federal government.

You say here that the correct reading of the Constitution allows the Federal government to use the Commerce Clause to ban assault weapons and "most anything".

So according to what you've written, the Second Amendment means the RKBA shall not be infringed by the Federal government, and the Commerce Clause means the RKBA may be infringed by the Federal government.

Would you clarify your two opinions above regarding the correct reading of the Commerce Clause and the Second Amendment?

[robertpaulsen]

"So according to what you've written, the Second Amendment means the RKBA shall not be infringed by the Federal government, and the Commerce Clause means the RKBA may be infringed by the Federal government."

Isn't that something?

I wonder why the NRA didn't support a lawsuit challenging the federal 1968 Gun Contol Act (and the 1994 AWB amendment) on second amendment grounds?

It was never done.