Assuming as you do (that states may dictate rules regarding keeping and bearing of arms) this clause would undermine the lack of uniformity among the states ( shall-issue, may-issue, concealed vs open carry) as now displayed.
Since they are not limited in what they may regulate (your notion) why haven't the folks at Commerce cracked-down on the lack of 'uniformity' in this regard? Where's the 'regulation'? Certainly nothing regular exists between the states regarding carry issues (and others).
It would. Your example demonstrates that the second amendment does not apply to the states -- if it did, equal protection and due process would demand that the laws be uniform.
"Since they are not limited in what they may regulate (your notion) why haven't the folks at Commerce cracked-down on the lack of 'uniformity' in this regard?"
Well, the Commerce Clause gives Congres the power. It doesn't mean that Congress must exercise the power.
It would. Your example demonstrates that the second amendment does not apply to the states -- if it did, equal protection and due process would demand that the laws be uniform.
"Since they are not limited in what they may regulate (your notion) why haven't the folks at Commerce cracked-down on the lack of 'uniformity' in this regard?"
Well, the Commerce Clause gives Congres the power. It doesn't mean that Congress must exercise the power.