Reports are saying bump-stock, and not trigger crank, as I expected.
In either case, I have a hard time defending them. People can call me "weak" for saying so, but I don't see any need, or practical legal use for equipment that increases the rate of fire by that degree.
It's a slippery slope to be sure. I hate rationalizing restrictions because "it doesn't negatively impact me." People want to limit the number of guns an individual can own to 10 (or whatever)? "No problem. I don't have room in the safe for more than 10." But allowing the erosion of freedom based on it not being YOUR freedom is a dangerous precedent. With that said, I'm growing more sympathetic to the people asking, "how the fuck did this guy have that kind of arsenal???"
Shitty days to be a responsible gun owner.