Federal Regulation Vs State Regulation

When our Founding Fathers declared independence from the British, they stated that the rights of men are given to them by God - including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - and that government should be instituted to secure those rights.
When the Revolutionary war had been won in 1783, the governmental system of the States at that time was weak and did not have power to settle disputes or the power to tax (for the proper needs such as national defense), so in 1787 delegates from 12 of the 13 States met in Philadelphia to revise the system, and they created an entirely new structure known as the Constitution of the United States. This paper will explore the impact of what federal versus state regulation can have on the perspective of gun control. There is no one national set of rules for the purchase, ownership, storage and discharge of firearms but the fifty-one potentially different sets of rules for each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia. The core of the gun control is the extent to which the Second Amendment protects the rights of the individual and their private ownership and use of his or her firearms.

In some cases, the judicial doctrine of federal preemption decides this question. The doctrine is based upon the basic constitutional principle that in those areas where the founding fathers gave Congress the constitutional authority to regulate, Congress has the right to insist on one uniform set of national regulations. Once Congress exercises this right by enacting a comprehensive set of federal regulations, the states are constitutionally prohibited from adopting any regulations that are inconsistent with the federal