Pepe_Silvia
#mikehawk
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2006
- Messages
- 23,528
- Likes
- 47,437
I don't. I think legally they could easily ban bumpstocks in a way that would pass constitutional muster like the "assault weapons" ban did. Where (and I hope it was purposeful) this EO can't be constitutional is they made a legally owned piece of property illegal to possess without a grandfather clause or recompense. If they can get away with doing it with bumpstocks they can get away with doing it to anything.
An "Assault Weapons" ban is unconstitutional imo, but I see your point. The courts are routinely on the wrong side of the Constitution.


