Who would enforce federal law? No one?
Let me get this straight. Congress can regulate interstate commerce, right? I mean, you do agree they can do that, right?
They just can enforce it. How special.
The 2nd Amendment applies to the feds only, right? that's what you keep saying. Well, then the BATFE must largely be disbanded (or at least redirected) precisely because it infringes on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I am a member of the militia, per unilateral act of Congress. I am registered therewith, and "regulated" as Congress sees fit. I want an M4 to practice with and have ready should I be called up. ...but the BATFE won't let me have one. Does that not infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms suitable for militia use?
No, the "join the National Guard" argument doesn't fly. They're a _subset_ of the militia. I am a member of the militia, just not within that subset.
No, the "keep it at a federal armory" argument doesn't fly. "the right of the people to KEEP ... arms" is not satisfied if only the gov't can keep them.
No, the "own something else" argument doesn't fly. M4s are the standard military weapon - not muskets.
You said in the post I responded to that gun laws were none of the Federal government's business.
Yes they do have that power. Of course as has been pointed out "regulate" had a somewhat different meaning in those days. Something on the order of "make to function properly". But no matter, they cannot exercise that power, or any other granted to them in the unamended Constitution in such a way as to violate the "restrictive clauses" of later amendments, including those we know as the Bill of Rights. IOW, they cannot infringe upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which all but the "A" of the BATFE is involved with. In fact since their transfer from treasury to Homeland Security, they aren't much involved in the "A" part anymore either, and what little function they do still perform in that arena could be done by the part of Treasury that does the rest.