Yes, I saw the language. However, I think that the rationale that firearms are manufactured and sold in interestate commerce is - at least in this case - over reaching.
I approve of stretching the limits of Congressional power in extreme cases when it is necessary. A good example is the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The rationale was the lunch counter that was discriminating served food and customers in interstate commerce which is similar to the law in question. However, not all of the states were interested in protecting the civil rights of all of their citizens. The federal government had to do something.
In this case, the magnitude of the harm is not anywhere near as great and the states have their own laws on the subject. In fact, if memory serves, the Supreme Court case was from Texas and the guy violated the federal but not the state law because the distances were different.
So, I maintain my position that this is an example of Congress over extending itself into the realm of the not needed instead of concetrating on doing a better job of what is needed. Sorry for the political diatribe. It must be the election coming on.