Accessoire pour tir automatique | Cour suprême US annule interdiction: Tirer en rafale-Accessoire Supreme-US annule interdiction

1. Accessoire tir en rafale
2. Cour suprême annulation interdiction
3. Tir rafale accessoire

The Supreme Court of the United States has overturned a federal regulation banning “bump stocks,” a device that increases the rate of fire of semi-automatic rifles, essentially turning them into machine guns. The decision, with six conservative judges against three progressives, ruled that the ATF had exceeded its authority by reclassifying “bump stocks” as machine guns in 2018. This decision stems from the Las Vegas massacre in 2017, where the shooter used rifles equipped with bump stocks to fire at a rapid rate. The ATF had initially planned to ban bump stocks following this tragedy, but the decision was reversed.

Related Story.

The US Supreme Court made a significant decision on Friday, overturning a federal regulation banning “bump stocks,” devices that increase the rate of fire of semi-automatic rifles, effectively turning them into machine guns.

In a six to three decision, with conservative judges in the majority, the Court ruled that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) had exceeded its authority by reclassifying “bump stocks” as machine guns in 2018, prohibited by a 1934 law from the Prohibition era.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing on behalf of the majority, stated that a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a machine gun because it cannot fire more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger, as defined by the 1934 law enacted long before the invention of such devices.

The backdrop of this case is the Las Vegas massacre, the deadliest in modern US history, where 58 people were killed and over 500 injured on October 1, 2017. The perpetrator used rifles equipped with bump stocks, allowing him to fire at a rate of up to nine bullets per second.

Following this tragedy, the ATF began reevaluating its stance on bump stocks. In February 2018, shortly after a school shooting in Florida where 17 people died, the administration of then-President Donald Trump pledged to ban bump stocks. By December of the same year, the ATF declared bump stocks to be machine guns, instructing owners to destroy them or surrender them to authorities within 90 days.

This decision by the Supreme Court has sparked debate and controversy across the country. Proponents of gun control argue that the availability of bump stocks poses a significant risk to public safety, citing incidents like the Las Vegas massacre as evidence of the need for stricter regulations. On the other hand, advocates of gun rights view the Court’s ruling as a victory for the Second Amendment and individual freedoms.

The implications of this decision extend beyond bump stocks themselves, raising questions about the limits of federal agencies’ regulatory powers and the interpretation of existing laws in the context of evolving technology. The Court’s ruling underscores the importance of clear and precise legislation in addressing complex issues like gun control.

As the debate over gun laws continues, it is crucial for policymakers, lawmakers, and the public to engage in constructive dialogue and seek common ground on this contentious issue. Finding solutions that balance public safety with individual rights remains a challenge, but the Supreme Court’s decision on bump stocks marks a significant development in the ongoing discussion surrounding gun control in the United States.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the ban on bump stocks has far-reaching implications for gun regulation in the US. It highlights the need for clarity and consistency in legislative efforts to address gun violence and underscores the complex nature of balancing public safety with individual rights in a society deeply divided on the issue of gun control.