What's your point? Obama/democrats never pushed for a bump stock ban, because they didn't even know what bump stocks were, nor did most republicans like a year and a half ago.
The 2 approvals were the prototypes going to ATF and ATF giving an okay. Obama didn't shill his department of justice to break the law by violating the constitution by overstepping its authority. NRA is worthless, but they likely would have sued if Obama had did it. Obama didn't do it though, Trump did. So NRA just came out and said "well, we should have a grandfather clause...maybe...."
Here's their current twitter on the day of the ban:
twitter.com/nra
>hurrr check out this based country singer faggot
>have you bought any (((Revolvers))) lately???
absolutely worthless.
This shit is likely all going to be upheld though, (((John Roberts))) just refused a stay on enforcement, other case stay still pending....before Sotomayor, lol, like we don't know how she's gonna decide.
youtube.com/watch?v=jYzyOCuohqs
>This is why I sat home and wouldn't vote for Romney and now I learned my lesson with Trump
pretty much.
It's a two-sided coin:
Clinton: 100.00% anti-gun, would appoint anti-gun justices around the country, but republicans would block her legislation.
Trump: 50/50? anti-gun (now we know, 100.00% anti-gun cuck, with this ban), appointing 50/50? anti-gun justices, republican congress likely willing to go forward with any gun control as long as Trump pushes it.
Clinton would have been bad, Trump was an unknown, so if you HAD to vote for one, Trump was the better choice.
Now that he's become a turncoat, our only hope is the courts knocking this shit down. So far though, we're getting 0 results.
So the irony is, we need an anti-gun cuck like Trump to put presumably Pro-Gun justices on the courts, to knock shit down, and assuming they actually knock shit down, Trump will have been the better choice.