Quote:
|
Originally Posted by s3779m
Personally, I don't care for one,...
|
You have a lot of company on that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by s3779m
Does that leave it open to congress writing a law banning bump stocks that they would uphold?
|
It leaves open congress writing a law without violating the APA by promulgating a too subjective reg that isn't especially related to the reg they put up for comment.
That doesn't bear on whether a bump stock ban would run afoul of something else, like the 2d Am.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by s3779m
The second problem, the SCOTUS had a problem with the claim the bump stock created a machine gun. They did not say the bump stock is protected by the second. Nor did they imply after market accessories, such as bump stocks, are protected.
|
Correct. This wasn't really a 2d Am. case. It was about whether ATF and DOJ had to only promulgate regs consistent with law.
The plaintiffs raised other issues, but the court resolved the matter on a narrower basis.