Re: Giffords Flak Claims SCOTUS 'Essentially Legalized Machine Guns' With Bump Stock Decision

"max headroom" <maximusheadroom@gmx.com> wrote in message news:v4huro$300gf$2@dont-email.me...

Giffords Flak Claims SCOTUS 'Essentially Legalized Machine Guns' With Bump Stock
Decision
>
Cam Edwards
>
While the Supreme Court has struck down the ATF's ban on bump stocks, it didn't
implicate the Second Amendment in its decision. Instead, the Court ruled that
the ATF impermissibly banned the non-mechanical devices through a gross
misreading of the federal statute that defines machine guns as firearms that
discharge multiple rounds through a single function of the trigger. Today's
decision does not change the fact that full-auto firearms are restricted under
the National Firearms Act, nor does it repeal the Hughes Amendment prohibiting
the purchase of any machine gun manufactured after 1987.
>
Justice Samuel Alito went so far as to explicitly state in his concurrence that
if Congress wants to ban bump stocks it can do so. All the Supreme Court said is
that the ATF alone can't ban the devices, at least not by claiming that they
turn semi-automatic firearms into machine guns.

Technically they aren't machine guns by definition. They are a rapid firing semi-automatic.
Yes, it's a minor difference, but that can be all it takes between being legal and illegal.