Subject: 2nd amendment madness
In Garland v. Cargill (view here, 10 am ET), a gunshop owner is challenging a 2018 ban on bump stocks, arguing they don’t enable rifles to shoot multiple rounds “automatically” and “by a single function of the trigger” as per the government’s definition of machine guns, which are banned. The owner points to the ongoing physical pressure required on a barrel when using a bump stock, arguing the process is neither automatic nor a “single function of the trigger.” The government disagrees, pointing to a bump stock’s reliance on a gun’s recoil to trigger additional shots per a single press of the trigger.

Our 'well regulated' militia needs machine guns.

And maybe it's moot anyway. Apparently you can make your own bump stock: https://www.quora.com/How-do-y...