• @derf82@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    518 days ago

    My point is, they did not rule a ban unconstitutional, since they asked where it was in the constitution.

    • @catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      318 days ago

      I read it as asking where in the Constitution there is a right to bump stocks. Did you read as asking where the ban is?

      • @derf82@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        218 days ago

        And there is no constitutional right to bump stocks. They just ruled there is no current law against it. If there was a constitutional right to them, you couldn’t ban them even with a law.

        I didn’t say he was asking where the ban is.