That ruling does remind us of an important fact.
The Second Amendment is about more than guns. It is about arms.
Basically any weapons suitable for service would be covered, including all common infantry arms (which at that time included any usable melee weapon, effectiveness in use being the main consideration) or archery weapons too (these had not fallen out of favor because they were inferior, a company of skilled longbowmen had they been available to the colonists could have seriously messed up a bunch of British regular routinely, but because they weren’t available being expensive, basically a lifelong profession of sorts, while muskets could be dropped into the hands of any poor sap who could then be drilled to stand there and be shot at as an expendable inexpensive soldier).
The concept of what is protected is related not to a time and place but the functionality of an arm for its time. I would go so far as to opine that a weapon that was utterly obsolete would have less 2nd Amendment protection than one that is cutting edge. Or, put another way, when “phasers” are a standard infantry Arm then “phasers” would be covered by the 2nd Amendment.
Right. If it protects nunchuks, it most certainly protects all types of firearms, and accessories for them.
Including "bump stocks".
Got that, Donald?