Here's what he said on Meet the Press:
Russert: Well, you’re for the Brady Bill...
Dean: Yep.
Russert: And you’re for a ban on assault weapons, so you are for gun control.
Dean: Look, what I’ve said is we should keep the federal laws and support them, and we should apply background checks, InstaCheck, to gun shows, right?
Russert: But why take the issue off the table? Debate it.
Dean: Because—well, you can debate it all you want.
Russert: Because it may hurt Democrats politically?
Dean: No. Different states are different. My state, we have no gun control. We also have one of the lowest homicide rates in the country. We’re a rural state with a lot of hunters in it. Right? In New York and New Jersey and California, they ought to have as much gun control as they want. My position is this is a state issue. Keep the federal laws. Enforce them vigorously. And then let every state decide what they want. Because when you say gun control in my state, people are going to think you’re taking the squirrel rifle their parents gave them away. When you say gun control in New Jersey and California and New York, they say “Great. Let’s get the machine guns and the handguns off the streets.” They’re both right. So why can’t each state decide for themselves over and above the federal law what they want or don’t want? What the result will be, you won’t get more gun control than what you’ve already got in Wyoming or Montana and Vermont, and you’ll get a lot more in California and New Jersey. Fine.
"In New York and New Jersey and California, they ought to have as much gun control as they want...
...When you say gun control in New Jersey and California and New York, they say “Great. Let’s get the machine guns and the handguns off the streets.” They’re both right. So why can’t each state decide for themselves[red] over and above the federal law what they want or don’t want?[/red] "
View Quote
Sorry Howard, there's that pesky Constitution with its 2nd Ammendment, that's why.