The federal government must be reigned in. The interstate commerce clause in the Constitution was NEVER intended to give the federal government virtually unlimited power.
Is that you, Justice Thomas?
I agree, it would seem to be a clause intended to prevent un-fair trade practices some states might employ against other states in 'commerce'. However, it seems too often directed at private enterprises while ignoring state actions that create 'unfair' trade such as the ban in California on magazines exceeding 10 rounds (Feinstein).
Had manufacturers of magazines refused to sell anything larger than a 10 round magazine to Californians, the Feds would be all over them. The state of California does it, and it's okie dokie. Nothing to see here. Move along- even though 'consumers' are not being served by the market- which is at the heart of 'commerce'.
As if the number of rounds in a magazine determines it's inherent lethality (and it doesn't- a single-shot can ruin your day), restrictions on such do indicate an inherent agenda which promotes collectivist ideals over individual freedoms that ought to be of a greater concern.
As Americans, we are at great risk of losing that which distinguishes us from other societies when we allow, at a whim, those acts which deny individual freedoms (in the interest of the 'collective') whose participation in our unique American experiment have, for the most part, been un-inspiring to say the least, and deadly when wrong.
Bart Simpson uses, "Get out'a the way, I'm Hitler", when his desires are obstructed. What we need to send to Washington are people who might likewise use, "Get out'a the way, I'm George Washington", when confronted with the inertia that befouls our freedom.
'Till then, we in California will continue to defend ourselves against 'anything less than eleven banditos at a time' until the commerce cavalry comes to our rescue.