"The ban was imposed by the Trump administration"

But please, gun enthusiasts, tell me again about how Biden is going to take away all of your guns any day now whereas Trump is 2A all the way.

Bumpstocks are oldshit in comparison to "super safeties." They push the trigger forward after you shoot. So you just squeeze, and you get quick individual trigger pulls at close to an automatic rate. It's also easier to aim. Also, it's a tiny piece you can 3d print. Also, I'm NOT linking it.

The ban on bump stocks was implemented using the Firearms' Owners Protection Act of 1986. Which was signed into law by Reagan (funny how a failed assassination will change things).

The text at issue is

SEC. 109. AMENDMENT OF NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT. (a) Section 58450)) of the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. 5845(b)) is amended by striking out "any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun," and inserting in lieu thereof "any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun,"

IMO the majority in this decision is choosing to blatantly ignore the text of the act which was clearly chosen to future-proof for any advancement which would result in an effortless high rate of fire such as bump stock and super safety. Instead they are insisting that Congress must amend the law to include specific parts which of course is a losing battle as there will always be a new part that achieves an effortless high rate of fire.

Now where one could argue that this ruling is correct is the accepted definition of a machinegun requires a single trigger action.

26 U.S.C. § 5845(b)

Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger

Personally I think the laws should be amended to define weapons and munitions by their result (high or continuous rate of fire) instead of their form or function. As it stands, someone could create a weapon that simply fires continuously but does not resemble a gun in any other way. Would such a weapon be a machinegun if it doesn't even have a trigger?

I think the dissenting opinion was more inline with the intent of FOPA.

So can hunter biden buy a bump stock now? I am shocked that the NRA was not representing hunter.

I'm all for gun control, though, I feel like banning bump stocks won't do much. Aren't they incredibly easy to make?

Of course they do. If it destabilizes society snd increases mortality in any way, its on their agenda

I got a bunch of leaves and my neighbor too. He's very rich. Can we please just burn all the leaves? The smoke will go east and there's nothing there, just a hospital and a premature baby nursery. I assume this is okay by the supreme court. Oh and we want to do it naked and we want to pop our guns into the fire. You know, for 4th of July stuff.

Bump stocks are largely irrelevant since the invention of Hellfire Triggers:

It's essentially a "bent piece of metal". I don't see how you could control that.

https://youtu.be/eUFkh7QKs1Q

Which can even be applied to pistols:

https://youtu.be/teoGHEPqd04

The Supreme Court could find this but couldn't find abortion.

Ok then.

Permanently Deleted

For once the Supreme Court makes the right call. Broken clocks and whatnot.

what a silly thing

I missed that part about bump stocks in the constitution.

e: Could someone please point it out for me?

Trump is no longer the only president to actually do something about guns in the last 20 years.

the right to bear arms exists to protect people from tyrants

the whole premise of this right is that we can't trust the government to keep our liberty safe because they could become the tyrants. if one day some religious idiot comes into power who doesn't want women learning math, you may end up glad that conservatives have made it easier for women to fight for their liberty by refusing to allow these rights to be eroded