Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion for the Supreme Court the “bump stock firearms” case may be more important for what it does not say than for what it does.
Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion for the Supreme Court in Garland v. Cargill—the “bump stock firearms” case—may be more important for what it does not say than for what it does.
On its face, Cargill granted a statutory victory to gun owners. Below that, however, it granted a constitutional victory to all grassroots Americans and inflicted a defeat on the powerful federal bureaucracy.
The topic addressed overtly was the ban on machine guns in the National Firearms Act of 1934. That law defines a “machine gun” as a firearm that can “shoot, automatically more than one shot … by a single function of the trigger.” […]
– Read More: www.theepochtimes.com
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: The Epoch Times
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://discernreport.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.