The United States Supreme Court struck down a ban on bump stocks Friday, June 14, after releasing their decision on the case known as Cargill v. Garland et Al. Bump stocks are a type of gun accessory that allows semi-automatic weapons to fire rapidly like machine guns. The high court ruled 6-3 that the federal ban was unconstitutional, violating the supreme law of the land. This decision is a step away from increased gun control and leaves Americans divided on the issue.

For context, the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) maintained that bump stocks were not machine guns for over a decade. Following a 2017 shooting in Las Vegas, which is the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history, the ATF reversed its stance. The Trump administration took moves to ban bump stocks during this time, as Trump personally said they “turn legal weapons into illegal machines.” Petitioner Michael Cargill surrendered his bump stocks due to the new regulation and filed a challenging lawsuit. His position argued that the ATF exceeded its authority in defining bump stocks as machine guns.

In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said that a firearm equipped with a bump stock does not meet the definition of “machine gun” under federal law. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote an intense dissent, sharing her liberal position that disagrees with the majority. She wrote, “when I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck,” in reference to bump stocks enabling rifles to operate like machine guns. In her opinion, bump stocks resemble machine guns so closely that they ought to fall under the definition of one. Sotomayor additionally read her dissent aloud in court, emphasizing her disapproval. She said this decision “will have deadly consequences.”

This decision represents efforts to decrease gun control in the United States. Guns affect countless Americans every single day. According to the CDC, more Americans died of gun-related injuries in 2021 (the latest year they have data from) than in any other year on record. In other words, guns are more and more deadly as time continues to pass. They enable violence and harm, whether it is self-inflicted or against other people. Furthermore, their accessibility to many people allows for mass-scale suffering, as seen in the tragic 2017 shooting in Las Vegas. Bans on bump stocks gained public support due to the 2017 shooting that killed 60 people. However, as time passes, people often forget the harmful nature of firearms.

Although the Supreme Court ruled against the federal ban, bump stocks will not immediately be accessible on a large scale. For instance, fifteen states and the District of Columbia have banned bump stocks. Reversing this ban will undermine recent gun control efforts on a theoretical, symbolic level. Practically, bump stocks will still be discouraged from being used in many American regions. However, this does not negate how influential this Supreme Court case is.

According to BBC, a spokesman for President Joe Biden expressed disapproval of the court’s decision, saying that “weapons of war have no place on the streets of America.” In contrast, former President Donald Trump’s campaign spokeswoman said, “the court has spoken and their decision should be respected.” This ideological divide regarding gun control in the United States proves to be a heated topic and will likely be discussed at length in an upcoming debate on June 27.

The future of the United States relies on the safety of its citizens, and guns continue to serve as weapons of mass destruction and pain. This Supreme Court decision supports the use of accessories that assist in increasing harm. Regardless of what exactly defines a “machine gun,” innocent people lose their lives to guns every day. We ought to protect these people.