Nope.
Nope.
Read the link I had in my post, particularly Section V, the "proposed rule." ATF wants to redefine what "a single function of the trigger" means in relation to machineguns.
I'll quote:
They call them "bump stock type devices" throughout the whole thing, but they don't limit themselves to just literal bumpstocks.
They would have to fix, or at least rearrange, the wording for that to “fit” binary triggers but I see they are looking at it.
But like I wrote in my write up to the nfa none of these things function as of fit the descriptions of a machine gun
But I guess soon enough my hands or at least my belt loops will be machineguns if they write the description to match my hands or beltloops