You will have 2 choices that are viable. Most likely Trump and the progressive the dems put forth. Take your time and think it over...

A bump stock is not a firearm, but it is a debatably a useful accessory for using a firearm. I believe the original intent of the founders, that at least 6 of my many great grandfathers fought for in the American Revolutionary War, was that armed citizens could prevent their government from becoming tyrannical. I do not think there was to be any limits on the weaponry and tools and accessories needed to use that weaponry against tyrants. What good are firearms without bullets? The Second Amendment was short, because they thought it was obvious in meaning. The word "Militia" was used because they wanted the people to come together against tyrants. They also expected people to come together against those who would use weapons improperly. Freedom is a right and a responsibility, that must be guarded.

Keith

Keith bullets are necessary to the intended function of the firearm. Bumpstocks aren't. Now don't get me wrong. I hope that the SCOTUS finds this ban unconstitutional. Scopes aren't necessary to the function of the firearm either. Dumb move by Trump and a strike against him.

I think they ( Trump Admin.) did the ban knowing it would be shot down in court ,
that way he shut up the anti's screaming " you are not doing anything about gun violence "
even though they really didn't do anything that would stick .imo We will see .

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I think the argument can be made, that anything that makes an arm, meaning weapon, more effective at keeping America secure, should be part of this right.

I have doubts about how useful a bump stock is.

Keith

we were told trump couldn't win also. no thanks marty. the mans word is no good