Explain how the paperwork involved is onerous, and leftist.
"Setting aside the question of whether the gun store owner was engaged in "interstate commerce", do you see any limit on power of Congress under the Commerce Clause?"
There is no limit given in the Constitution. The founder's assumed commerce would be regulated to flourish, not regulated out of existence, so no limit was given. As Franklin said at the closing of the Convention, that the Constitution wasn't perfect, it was left up to the future what folks would make of it.
In case you aren't keeping score, mark Red's in the "out of existence" column.
Anytime a bureaucrat is given the kinds of power the BATFE has, it will be abused. Red's is just one in a long line of dealers being rail-roaded out of the industry by crap like this.
I said nothing about paperwork, onerous or otherwise. I referred to the vast expansion of federal power under the umbrella of the Commerce cause. (A cherished goal of Leftists.) Do you deny that such an expansion has occurred?
There is no limit given in the Constitution. The founder's assumed commerce would be regulated to flourish, not regulated out of existence, so no limit was given. As Franklin said at the closing of the Convention, that the Constitution wasn't perfect, it was left up to the future what folks would make of it.
That is where we disagree. I believe that the Constitution is clear that Congress may regulate trade that across state boundaries (i.e., interstate commerce) to ensure that states do not erect trade barriers against each other. That power did not originally extend to manufacturing, agriculture, or local business.
Under your "no limits" concept, there is effectively nothing that can restrict the power of the Federal government, which is to say that the Constitution is largely a dead letter.