Last I looked, our rights are not unlimited. Regulation of firearm ownership is Constitutional.<quoted text>
Last time I looked the 2nd AoA is shall not be infringed. So no Congress was Not granted the authority to do so. Further at the time period of the NFA, a 200 tax on a 5 dollar suppressor or a 200 dollar tax on a 25 to 60 dollar firearm is a prohibitive tax, no way around it, so the NFA was in direct violation of the 2nd AoA due to the intent.
So sorry, but just because the system has been abused for years does not mean that bastardizing the commerce clause is Constitutional. It show corruption. US v Lopez actually showed that there Is a limit to the commerce clause, but did congress listen, nope, they modified a few words then later changed a few more things and added it under a slightly different name to another bill.
But according to you this is proper and correct?
Most of the rest of your post is fluff, except government regulation is not serving the people, anymore it is nothing but ways to make paper criminals and force the governments will onto people at the point of a gun, so to speak.
We are a nation of laws. Whenever Congress passes a law that violates the Constitution, it is overturned by the Supreme Court. That's the way it's always worked and the way it continues to work.
Currently we have an activist conservative majority on the Court which is acting on its political ideology rather than the law. So there have been some bad decisions which will eventually be overturned whenever we get a court that once again respects the Constitution and legal precedent. Until then we live under the law of the land and work to ensure that the rightwing extremist ideologues don't do too much damage.
But I do agree with part of your last paragraph - government regulation is not currently serving the people well. It has been and is being twisted to benefit the privileged few at the expense of the rest of us. It's sad you don't feel any outrage about that.