if I may give my opinion from far away - Europe :

quote
'if a machine gun fires multiple rounds with the single manipulation of the trigger'
unquote
is a clear statement

But - if this 'bump stock' by the forward movement of the action 'impinges' on the trigger finger and thereby
makes the gun fire again, in rapid succession, thereby producing in effect a 'continuous rate of fire', then I fear
that the 'anti gunners' might well be able to get a popular vote!
Is it worth giving the opposition a probably easy 'fear' argument against 'war' weapons?
Does anyone actually need (or want) 'fully auto' (or bump) guns -which have been outlawed for civilian use for some time already?

Don't misunderstand - my interest is in the continuation of the NRA and all it stands for.

As a reader of the American Rifleman every month I follow the discussion avidly and of course am on the side of the NRA!
But, the times we live in now (anti-gun mostly!) we have to be careful and believable.

Silly little things can and have swung popular votes! Beware!

Günter
NRA Life 1974