In a decision that echoes like a chilling omen, the Supreme Court has callously undone a Trump-era regulation banning bump stocks — devilish add-ons to firearms that transform them into death machines, mimicking the rapid fire of military-grade weaponry.
Liberal justices, like lone voices crying out in a gathering storm, vehemently dissented. Justice Sonia Sotomayor condemned the ruling with searing clarity: “When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck… Because I, like Congress, call that a machine-gun, I respectfully dissent.”
Yet, despite the impassioned pleas of reason and sanity, the Court has placed these instruments of mass destruction back into civilian hands, heedless of the blood-soaked history they carry. The scars of past atrocities, like the Las Vegas massacre of 2017, still seep with the agony of over 500 souls torn asunder in just 11 minutes by the merciless rain of bullets unleashed by a single gunman armed with bump stocks.
MSNBC’s Katie Phang, her voice trembling with the weight of tragedy, recounts the horrors: “The Las Vegas shooter… had 18 rifles and a handgun. Thirteen of the rifles were outfitted with bump stocks… With the assistance of the bump stocks, the killer unleashed a total of 1,049 rounds in just 11 minutes.”
Don't Miss
Representative Dina Titus of Nevada warned: “This is terrifying for so many communities impacted by gun violence… This fight is far from over.”
Fred Guttenberg, his heart still aching from the loss of his daughter in the Parkland school shooting, denounced the ruling as nothing short of radical, casting the Supreme Court as architects of doom: “They have guaranteed that more Americans will die from gun violence… They have also guaranteed that the talk of violence by MAGA will be more deadly.”
Even voices from within the law enforcement community, normally stoic and composed, reacted with apprehension.
The New York Times correspondent Glenn Thursh slammed the ruling, saying: “The Supreme Court is going far beyond where any court has gone on guns.”
Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, with a grim montage of terror, forces us to confront the sounds of the apocalypse: “Listen to the gunfire… Automatic fire — a continuous spray of bullets enabled by a bump stock… That is what the Supreme Court just legalized.”
As the echoes of dissent fade into the night, the specter of impending doom looms large. With each pull of the trigger, the promise of tragedy draws nearer, and the Supreme Court’s decision stands as a harbinger of the horrors yet to come.
