In a recent 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that bump stocks, an accessory for semi-automatic rifles, do not fall under the definition of 'machineguns' as outlined in federal law. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, stated that while bump stocks allow for rapid trigger reengagement, they do not enable a firearm to shoot automatically more than one shot with a single trigger pull.
The case, Garland v. Cargill, questioned whether bump stocks convert rifles into machineguns. The Court determined that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock does not meet the statutory definition of a machinegun.
