View Full Version : ATF has posted their proposed brace rules.
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-07-21, 17:35
As expected, it is a S-Show.
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/06/07/criteria-attached-stabilizing-braces/
It appears to ban just about everything. If you have a red dot, flip-up sights, etc you are well on your way to having an NFA item.
So adding an lpvo essentially makes an sbr according to this points system… what a joke
So what’s the prize for getting the highest score?
Great, make it as confusing and open to interpretation as possible, in order to turn law-abiding citizens into criminals
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let's see how long it will take before this thread dissolves into a name calling match?
There’s no wrong way to shoot a pistol except when there is.
Let's see how long it will take before this thread dissolves into a name calling match?
I’ll start. Anyone who thinks this is in any way acceptable, is a blithering idiot! :mad:
As expected, it is a S-Show.
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/06/07/criteria-attached-stabilizing-braces/
It appears to ban just about everything. If you have a red dot, flip-up sights, etc you are well on your way to having an NFA item.
Here's hoping the ADA goes full pit bull.
Great, make it as confusing and open to interpretation as possible, in order to turn law-abiding citizens into criminals
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ATF "open to interpretation" decrees 101.
https://youtu.be/8nfCyhOX42g
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But... math is racist yo! There is no "right" answer for everyone. It about the process and how it helps your self esteem.
Y'all just hate my pistol cuz she's black!
I wonder how many people bought these braced pistols in good faith, don't do crimes and are not online gun forum junkies? How many of these people even have heard of the ATF ruling on these things, and how many of these people will even realize that they own contraband that could make them instant criminals?
I am sure in the near future they will use the same convoluted, arbitrary point system when it comes time to “regulate assault weapons”.
Looking at the point system criteria, I remember seeing lots of Thompson Center Arms competition pistols over the years with scopes and bi-pods. Would these also fall under these new regulations?
I wonder how many people bought these braced pistols in good faith, don't do crimes and are not online gun forum junkies? How many of these people even have heard of the ATF ruling on these things, and how many of these people will even realize that they own contraband that could make them instant criminals?
There are going to be a hell of a lot of folks that fall into that category. Not to mention the millions of short barrel uppers that are already out there making potential felons of the uninformed.
It really shouldn't be this easy to earn 10 years in prison.
Oh man, they've gone and done it now. I'm going to vote SO HARD in 2022... SO HARD.
I might even go for the jugular (theoretically speaking) and send them and my representatives a stern and articulate email voicing my displeasure.
Then, for good measure, I will rant about the ordeal on Facebook and make sure everyone in my echo chamber understands my stance for the 1000th time.
Of course, I'll then have to post another rant about my previous rant having been deleted by Facebook, just so they know I'm no quitter.. until they completely delete my account permanently, of course..
(This is all so tiresome).
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-07-21, 20:41
It is. But we all need to comment and definitely harass our representatives. Senators, even those in the minority, can create endless hassle for the agencies so we need to let them know this is incredibly important to us.
We need to reach out to our Senators and ask them to stop this unconstitutional nonsense.
Didn’t we do that a few months ago in regards to this proposal? Didn’t they shut comments down after only a couple weeks?
We need to stop giving them legitimacy. The stoners didn’t get legalization by writing letters to the DEA.
As far as I know, the only way to object is through these damn comment periods so unless you've got a better plan, I'd get started having everyone you know go ahead and play the game, write the comment, call their representatives and encourage others to do the same. No reason that everyone on here can't get 10 people they know to take a few minutes out of their days to voice their displeasure via email or phone. I know it's borderline retarded, but if people spent as much time rallying their peers to voice their opinions as we all do writing and reading on gun forums, we'd bury these politicians and the damn ATF with the numbers of Americans that are sick of watching the left win at everything.
Put it this way if it gets people going: if you don't bother to do these things then Biden, Harris, Feinstein, Schumer, AOC, Nadler, Merrick Garland and the rest of these people that hate you and everything you hold dear, will get another win. We lose. Again. I'm tired of losing anything to these nitwits and I don't want to give them the satisfaction of winning anything... ever.
I read somewhere that between 3 million and 7 million braced pistols have been sold. I don't see how all of these owners are going to be notified, and there is going to be so much confusion and irritation caused, this could end up being a giant fiasco that is unenforceable.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-07-21, 23:02
I read somewhere that between 3 million and 7 million braced pistols have been sold. I don't see how all of these owners are going to be notified, and there is going to be so much confusion and irritation caused, this could end up being a giant fiasco that is unenforceable.
It’s a feature not a bug to them. They want to make owning guns difficult. Make it so that you have to pay attention to the news otherwise one day you were not being a felon, kind of takes the coolness out of holding guns. A lot of people will just say screw it and sell or turn their crap in. Imagine all the people who have guns from relatives passing away they don’t even know what they own. Plus this doesn’t cost them anything. They don’t have to divert any money from any programs they actually want to run.
Just follow the law guys. It’s good for you. Don’t even talk about anything other than complying and being a good little citizen.
Keep voting at them, keep writing those letters and making those phone calls. Just comply. Keep following orders.
IT’S THE LAW!
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-07-21, 23:44
Anyone have pictures of examples of what would pass? I was looking at all the ways to get points and then at the bottom if I read it right you get four points?
It’s a feature not a bug to them. They want to make owning guns difficult. Make it so that you have to pay attention to the news otherwise one day you were not being a felon, kind of takes the coolness out of holding guns. A lot of people will just say screw it and sell or turn their crap in. Imagine all the people who have guns from relatives passing away they don’t even know what they own. Plus this doesn’t cost them anything. They don’t have to divert any money from any programs they actually want to run.
Keep the brace on it = illegal. Put a stock on it = illegal. Have a legal brace + a Red Dot = illegal. At some point you can't win if you play their game, so maybe just don't play the game. I can't speak for those who have to use public gun ranges to shoot because that's not even part of my lifestyle. We could go generations out here and never encounter any issues with anything firearm related we own, except if it causes a range fire. I still say a majority of braced pistol owners will never know what they have is contraband.
Pressingonward
06-08-21, 00:21
They even give you a point for NOT having sights on your pistol...think about that one if you're one point away from being an SBR and have to send your red dot in for warranty repair or something...unlikely the feds would come knocking at the same time, but it could happen. What a load of hogwash.
ViniVidivici
06-08-21, 02:10
FUUCK them.
As somebody who has no braced firearms and a few SBR's this memo means absolutely nothing to me.
Not because I don't like braces or anything like that, only that after shooting NFA stuff for almost 20 years at this point, nobody gives a **** if your SBR has papers or not, and the roughly 2200 agents at the ATF have zero ability to enforce of if this shit on an individual basis.
I dont care if somebody is shooting an 80 ****ing point pistol, if they are not spot checking SBR's, engraving/922r/transport docs, has not been an issue once in the age of internet they are damn well not going to spot check pistols. From a practical standpoint, there really is not much of an incentive to even fill out a form 1 anymore.
Are lowers available? Are uppers available, well there you go.
The only place that this is likely to become a factor is if one is flying with a Pistol AR. Other than that this can be filed with 922r, engraving, transport docs and dog license as items that have been an issues approximately never.
Pistol Braces are an example of human ingenuity as a work around. NFA laws make no sense and have ZERO affect on public safety. The BATFE is just more government and more regulations.
Pistol Braces defy the NFA and so this is more of an egoic battle that the BATFE must win. It has nothing to do with public safety.
Many may be ignorant of changes regarding pistol braces without any consequences. However pistol braced weapons will no longer be go to choices for home and personal defense.
The USA with its constitution was supposed to limit government and yet the USA has the biggest government in the world. We have a fake president, a woke military, and a looming requirement to get an experimental shot that doesn't even prevent one from getting the ccp lab virus or spreading it. It supposedly just lessons the severity of the symptoms.
Nothing makes sense anymore.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-08-21, 07:53
Looking at the point system criteria, I remember seeing lots of Thompson Center Arms competition pistols over the years with scopes and bi-pods. Would these also fall under these new regulations?
If someone wanted to use a pistol brace with their TC Contender and limited eye relief scope and bi-pod then I'd assume they'd be under the same point scheme scrutiny.
I disagree with all of it on general shall not be infringed basis, but it looks like whoever was involved with this knew a bit more about firearms than the congressman explaining the 'shoulder things that goes up", although same mentality.
https://i.imgur.com/VJcsLBF.png
I read somewhere that between 3 million and 7 million braced pistols have been sold. I don't see how all of these owners are going to be notified, and there is going to be so much confusion and irritation caused, this could end up being a giant fiasco that is unenforceable.
If they deem most pistol braced firearms as SBR’s then they have written SBR’s into common use and are therefore it’s illegal to regulate with a tax and invalidates the short barrel portion of the NFA.
Oh man, they've gone and done it now. I'm going to vote SO HARD in 2022... SO HARD.
I might even go for the jugular (theoretically speaking) and send them and my representatives a stern and articulate email voicing my displeasure.
Then, for good measure, I will rant about the ordeal on Facebook and make sure everyone in my echo chamber understands my stance for the 1000th time.
Of course, I'll then have to post another rant about my previous rant having been deleted by Facebook, just so they know I'm no quitter.. until they completely delete my account permanently, of course..
(This is all so tiresome).
I had a round table with my local Congresswoman yesterday. E-mails, letters and faxes do not do a damn thing. You want their attention blow up the switchboard to the capital.
Dan
As somebody who has no braced firearms and a few SBR's this memo means absolutely nothing to me.
Not because I don't like braces or anything like that, only that after shooting NFA stuff for almost 20 years at this point, nobody gives a **** if your SBR has papers or not, and the roughly 2200 agents at the ATF have zero ability to enforce of if this shit on an individual basis.
I dont care if somebody is shooting an 80 ****ing point pistol, if they are not spot checking SBR's, engraving/922r/transport docs, has not been an issue once in the age of internet they are damn well not going to spot check pistols. From a practical standpoint, there really is not much of an incentive to even fill out a form 1 anymore.
Are lowers available? Are uppers available, well there you go.
The only place that this is likely to become a factor is if one is flying with a Pistol AR. Other than that this can be filed with 922r, engraving, transport docs and dog license as items that have been an issues approximately never.
I get your point, but you’ll likely run into issues if you use your braced pistol in something like a home defense shooting. There will inevitably be some Karen type junior volunteer ATF agent at the range willing to report your unregistered “SBR.”
If they deem most pistol braced firearms as SBR’s then they have written SBR’s into common use and are therefore it’s illegal to regulate with a tax and invalidates the short barrel portion of the NFA.
That sir, is an excellent point.
If they deem most pistol braced firearms as SBR’s then they have written SBR’s into common use and are therefore it’s illegal to regulate with a tax and invalidates the short barrel portion of the NFA.
This. This is the argument we need to be making. If braced "pistols" are SBRs, then we already have millions of unregistered SBRs in the wild, and have for years (not to mention the ones with actual stocks on them). If they were a real problem, we would know about it by now.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-08-21, 08:24
If they deem most pistol braced firearms as SBR’s then they have written SBR’s into common use and are therefore it’s illegal to regulate with a tax and invalidates the short barrel portion of the NFA.
I like the way you think.
On the whole site and read that issue, I say we file a suit based on the ADA and age discrimination because us old people have a hard time using anything but a red dot to aim.
This. This is the argument we need to be making. If braced "pistols" are SBRs, then we already have millions of unregistered SBRs in the wild, and have for years (not to mention the ones with actual stocks on them). If they were a real problem, we would know about it by now.
But Dayton and Boulder…. 0.0001% were used illegally!
I get your point, but you’ll likely run into issues if you use your braced pistol in something like a home defense shooting. There will inevitably be some Karen type junior volunteer ATF agent at the range willing to report your unregistered “SBR.”
I have purchased exactly 2 weapons that started out with braces. Over a 2 year period did both as SBR's on the Form 1. I think I am finished with the NFA process for any future weapons. Time to probably just fade into the background. For home defense it won't be any issue out here in the hinterlands because it will be a non-event, at least for the public record.
The BATFE in not a neutral government entity. They work for the anti- gun establishment. All their efforts reflect that reality.
I read somewhere that between 3 million and 7 million braced pistols have been sold. I don't see how all of these owners are going to be notified, and there is going to be so much confusion and irritation caused, this could end up being a giant fiasco that is unenforceable.
Agreed. The effect it had on me was being unable to go to local range for some time after leaving the police unit. My ARs were not state-compliant and the range staff and other shooters made a scene if anyone had a non-Jersey complaint firearm. Not sure how far it would have gone; would they call local PD, not worth finding out how jammed up one would get. So I made some "permanent" changes to new jerseyfy one rifle so at least I could still go shoot. Won't be able to do that with the 12.5" barrel Troy so that will eliminate the going to the range for all intents and purposes, at least with that item.
Agreed. The effect it had on me was being unable to go to local range for some time after leaving the police unit. My ARs were not state-compliant and the range staff and other shooters made a scene if anyone had a non-Jersey complaint firearm. Not sure how far it would have gone; would they call local PD, not worth finding out how jammed up one would get. So I made some "permanent" changes to new jerseyfy one rifle so at least I could still go shoot. Won't be able to do that with the 12.5" barrel Troy so that will eliminate the going to the range for all intents and purposes, at least with that item.
This is the issue with having to shoot at a range. I guess it's the norm for many parts of the US. I haven't been to a gun range since I retired from the Army in 1999. It's all one giant range out here. Pick a direction and shoot, just try to avoid the occasional cow grazing.
P2Vaircrewman
06-08-21, 10:11
Look at it as a possible opportunity to to buy one cheap then stamp it.
BoringGuy45
06-08-21, 10:21
If they deem most pistol braced firearms as SBR’s then they have written SBR’s into common use and are therefore it’s illegal to regulate with a tax and invalidates the short barrel portion of the NFA.
I was thinking the same damn thing. Honestly, it would really hard to uphold the SBR regulations with that argument.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-08-21, 10:30
Is there a threshold number for common use? And how would common use apply in context of regulating something that had previously not been regulated (half million bump stocks) or things currently regulated (1.5m suppressors)?
Diamondback
06-08-21, 10:48
Yup, the game is a Kafka Trap designed to make compliance impossible. This should scare us all because there are people in the gun community who have openly declared that if gov intends to forcibly make felons of them they're gonna make sure they get their Big Red F worth out of the deal...
ViniVidivici
06-08-21, 11:18
Me, I have never, and will never, pay an extra 200 bucks to own something that is perfectly normal.
And, lest we forget, the authority of an illegitimate oligarchy is, illegitimate.
Anyone have pictures of examples of what would pass? I was looking at all the ways to get points and then at the bottom if I read it right you get four points?
There are actually several examples with pictures in the body of the proposed ruling: atf.gov/file/154871/download
This part cracked me up:
As ATF does not anticipate anyone choosing to turn in a firearm with an attached stabilizing brace into ATF for disposal, so no cost was attributed to this scenario.
And here, they explain why there is no registration amnesty built in:
Alternative 5—Forgiveness of the NFA Tax. This alternative would allow
individuals and entities that currently have firearms with attached “stabilizing braces” to
apply and register firearms under the NFA without paying the $200 making tax. In this
scenario, the societal costs would be the same except there would be no transfer payment.
Similar to the proposed rule, the bulk of this cost would be the foregone future revenue
and the loss in property for individuals not applying under the NFA.30 This scenario was
rejected because “stabilizing braces” are not serialized and an individual or entity could
merely register all firearms possessed with the intent of later obtaining a “stabilizing
brace.” Further, although the “brace” is used on a particular weapon, an individual might
register all pistols as SBRs and then attempt to utilize other stocks on these firearms.
To be completely honest, I think the above reason is probably why the original proposal from December was abandoned...
^^^^^^ Anyone who thinks they are going to get a free tax stamp out of this nonsense is mistaken.
Is there a place where there are templates or "pony"s for sending comments to the ATF? I guess the "frame or receiver" comment period is still open and I'd like to do both. again better than nothing?
NoveskeFan
06-08-21, 12:27
Is there a place where there are templates or "pony"s for sending comments to the ATF? I guess the "frame or receiver" comment period is still open and I'd like to do both. again better than nothing?
They haven't opened the comment period for this brace proposal, yet.
I get your point, but you’ll likely run into issues if you use your braced pistol in something like a home defense shooting. There will inevitably be some Karen type junior volunteer ATF agent at the range willing to report your unregistered “SBR.”
That sir, is an excellent point.
So don't use pistol AR for home defense. Reserve that for when shit goes sideways and shot no longer matters.
As for the volunteer ATF agent, honestly nobody cares. I shot SBR's at public ranges outside of Balitmore for almost a decade and no ****s were given,
Here's hoping the ADA goes full pit bull.
The ADA is a piece of anti-discriminations legislation; Americans with Disabilities Act, not an organization. It focuses mostly on their physical environment, not sure how it would apply and access to services.
grizzlyblake
06-08-21, 13:55
So, how does this get passed into law? Same as any other new federal law?
COUNTERPROPOSAL
You let me buy factory SBRs to include imports and you reduce the tax by $100 and you make it cash and carry. Just check off a box on the 4473
Coal Dragger
06-08-21, 14:23
How in the hell does ATF think they’re actually going to enforce that shit?
Here’s what it’s going to be used for just like every other ATF rule/law: extra charges when someone gets arrested for something. They can throw in an extra new gun charge where Tyrone is not only a convicted felon in possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute, but he also has a gun. Not just any gun, but an NFA regulated SBR! How scary and dastardly. He needs extra time in prison.
Then ATF can tour new statistics about how more and more NFA regulated items are being used in, or recovered from baddies. Giving them more reasons to come up with more rules.
So, how does this get passed into law? Same as any other new federal law?
No ATF just makes it a rule and you're effed. Bureaucratic rules made by unelected officials in the dark.
So don't use pistol AR for home defense. Reserve that for when shit goes sideways and shot no longer matters.
As for the volunteer ATF agent, honestly nobody cares. I shot SBR's at public ranges outside of Balitmore for almost a decade and no ****s were given,
I’m sure lots of folks (maybe even most) have had experiences like yours. SBRs are rare in Illinois and I had to get approval from my gun club’s board of directors to shoot my SBRs at our range. I also have to have and be able to present on request proof of my C&R (IL requirement to posses an SBR) and proof of my stamps while on club property. I’ve also had more than few questions from participants and officials while shooting USPSA PCC with an SBR.
You should move to a "freer" state :)
Diamondback
06-08-21, 14:45
COUNTERPROPOSAL
You let me buy factory SBRs to include imports and you reduce the tax by $100 and you make it cash and carry. Just check off a box on the 4473
You're being generous, Fly; my counterproposal was "go take a bath in toluene and light yourselves on fire." :) This is what a German friend who self-identifies as "anarcho-Commie" says about her thoughts on 2A, and I'm mostly inclined to agree other than her anime catgirl fetish...
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/655632728812683276/801312571386101800/unknown.png
You're being generous, Fly; my counterproposal was "go take a bath in toluene and light yourselves on fire." :) This is what a German friend who self-identifies as "anarcho-Commie" says about her thoughts on 2A, and I'm mostly inclined to agree other than her anime catgirl fetish...
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/655632728812683276/801312571386101800/unknown.png
I stand with Anime Catgirls, bruh
Someone needs to challenge the constitutionality of the entire ATF "Rule" making process. These permanent bureaucracies are the tip of what is wrong with this country right now. It will only get worse as Chi-den and company subject us to even more corrupt global rule makers like the WHO and others.
I give you corporate tax minimums from the G7 as exhibit A.
We needed an enema and instead gobbled down a bucket load of sharp cheddar.
Diamondback
06-08-21, 14:52
I stand with Anime Catgirls, bruh
Just because I don't share her taste doesn't mean I'd try to stop her from enjoying it if the opportunity arose (doubly so since, with her not being my GF it wouldn't be my place); what happens between consenting adults stays between consenting adults. :)
Just because I don't share her taste doesn't mean I'd try to stop her from enjoying it if the opportunity arose (doubly so since, with her not being my GF it wouldn't be my place); what happens between consenting adults stays between consenting adults. :)
Does she look like the Baroness?
How anarcho Communist is she?
And has she seen Attack on Titan?
You can show her my posts unless sheÂ’s too fat or in a lot of debt
https://media2.giphy.com/media/l1J9HX2NOtjEpIxJC/giphy.gif
Diamondback
06-08-21, 15:25
Does she look like the Baroness?
How anarcho Communist is she?
And has she seen Attack on Titan?
You can show her my posts unless sheÂ’s too fat or in a lot of debt
LOL She's also very spoken for, and not by me. ;) And more than once I've forwarded stuff from here, including yours, that's drawn a laugh...
You should move to a "freer" state :)
You got that right!
COUNTERPROPOSAL
You let me buy factory SBRs to include imports and you reduce the tax by $100 and you make it cash and carry. Just check off a box on the 4473 And the dudes with pistol braces keep them with no additional regulation. Then we take the other half of the NFA tax later.
You're being generous, Fly; my counterproposal was "go take a bath in toluene and light yourselves on fire." :) This is what a German friend who self-identifies as "anarcho-Commie" says about her thoughts on 2A, and I'm mostly inclined to agree other than her anime catgirl fetish...
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/655632728812683276/801312571386101800/unknown.png
I, too, want CAS on tap. Just for buzzing by, of course.
LOL She's also very spoken for, and not by me. ;) And more than once I've forwarded stuff from here, including yours, that's drawn a laugh...
If he’s blonde and blue eyed and wispy, this can still work out somehow. All the more better if he’s Czech.
And the dudes with pistol braces keep them with no additional regulation. Then we take the other half of the NFA tax later.
I, too, want CAS on tap. Just for buzzing by, of course.
Agreed and agreed. I’d actually DX A-10s for them new fancy F-15s.
If he’s blonde and blue eyed and wispy, this can still work out somehow. All the more better if he’s Czech.
Agreed and agreed. I’d actually DX A-10s for them new fancy F-15s.
Yessir. Afterburner loud.
If I was someone that owned an AR pistol with brace, I would ignore all BATF BS and refuse to comply. As suggested by another poster, don't use an AR pistol for self-defense and do not shoot it at a public range. Keep it to shooting on private property of friends and otherwise keep it set away for when the world goes to crap.
Diamondback
06-08-21, 18:37
If I was someone that owned an AR pistol with brace, I would ignore all BATF BS and refuse to comply. As suggested by another poster, don't use an AR pistol for self-defense and do not shoot it at a public range. Keep it to shooting on private property of friends and otherwise keep it set away for when the world goes to crap.
Or just keep a no-brace bare tube ready to swap on for if you HAVE to use public ranges--if I'm reading the chart right "no brace = no problem." PWS Ratcheting Endplates may be a solution that finally found their problem...
Diamondback
06-08-21, 18:40
If he’s blonde and blue eyed and wispy, this can still work out somehow. All the more better if he’s Czech.
Agreed and agreed. I’d actually DX A-10s for them new fancy F-15s.
Actually he's Stout & Sauerkraut. :P Re the "new" F-15's, they're basically the Saudi and Singapore models with the USAF-proprietary stuff swapped back in, nothing to particularly give a tech-savvy wingnut a stiffy like a Silent Eagle would've.
PWS Ratcheting Endplates may be a solution that finally found their problem...
How so?
Diamondback
06-08-21, 19:15
How so?
Quick-change for unstaked backends. Before SB introduced their A3/A4 line that use standard buffer tubes and made the rear-swap as simple as "yank brace off/slide stock on," this was the rear-end part toward a 2-in-1 quick-change CQBP-to-SPR I was penciling out--basically using the Cry Havoc system like GAU-5 to put together a kit with pistolized-Mk 18 and Mk 12 front/rear ends around a common "receiver core."
Common Use: 10-40 million pistol braces in circulation…
https://thegunfeed.com/common-use-10-40-million-pistol-braces-in-circulation/
Or just keep a no-brace bare tube ready to swap on for if you HAVE to use public ranges--if I'm reading the chart right "no brace = no problem." PWS Ratcheting Endplates may be a solution that finally found their problem...
Would it still have to conform to the 26" maximum? Or 64-120oz weight? I found it halarious you can apparently get dinged a point for "no sights".
Would it still have to conform to the 26" maximum? Or 64-120oz weight? I found it halarious you can apparently get dinged a point for "no sights".
Yes. Look at the form. It's the first items.
Yes. Look at the form. It's the first items.
Got it, thanks. What happens when it is sub-12" or over 26"? Automatically a pistol or an AOW?
Diamondback
06-08-21, 20:06
Would it still have to conform to the 26" maximum? Or 64-120oz weight? I found it halarious you can apparently get dinged a point for "no sights".
Considering that my folder-and-A5 Mk 18 comes in at 25.925 with flash hider removed... over 26, doesn't it just become "Title I Firearm" like the old (not the new version) Thompson 1927A5?
Got it, thanks. What happens when it is sub-12" or over 26"? Automatically a pistol or an AOW?
This is spelled out in the body text of the ruling but my understanding is basically this:
Less than 12" => Things this size aren't difficult to use single handedly so there is no legitimate reason to add a brace to them => If you add a brace then it is assumed that you intend to shoulder it and it's automatically judged as NFA.
Over 26" => These are too long and unwieldly to fire accurately one handed, so there is no legitimate reason to add a brace to them => If you add a brace then it is assumed that you intend to shoulder it and it's automatically judged as NFA.
If I was someone that owned an AR pistol with brace, I would ignore all BATF BS and refuse to comply. As suggested by another poster, don't use an AR pistol for self-defense and do not shoot it at a public range. Keep it to shooting on private property of friends and otherwise keep it set away for when the world goes to crap.
The world is already crap...
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-08-21, 21:04
Someone needs to challenge the constitutionality of the entire ATF "Rule" making process. These permanent bureaucracies are the tip of what is wrong with this country right now. It will only get worse as Chi-den and company subject us to even more corrupt global rule makers like the WHO and others.
I give you corporate tax minimums from the G7 as exhibit A.
We needed an enema and instead gobbled down a bucket load of sharp cheddar.
I think that Gorsuch has a B in his bonnet over regulatory agencies taking over for legislative activities. I don’t doubt that they melange of ADA, Second Amendment, and regulatory reform might tie this up in the courts for a while. Or at least get an injunction.
Of course at the first pick up, and even if there was a grandfather clause, there are numerous states and cities that will just go and found them out right anyways. Frankly here in Colorado we are facing a way that Boak and Meeus and Balthezar are going to start instituting their own bans. That is what I’m more worried about right now.
And Yes, I am looking at other states.
Diamondback
06-08-21, 21:14
Of course at the first pick up, and even if there was a grandfather clause, there are numerous states and cities that will just go and found them out right anyways. Frankly here in Colorado we are facing a way that Boak and Meeus and Balthezar are going to start instituting their own bans. That is what I’m more worried about right now.
And Yes, I am looking at other states.
For good reason, the Lefties started moving their pushes to state-level after we refused to let Ban Renewal go to Shrub's desk then spiked every Federal effort under Obuttmunch.
Something I just thought about. This paves the way for them to start nitpicking firearms without braces, too. Like RDS on handguns, for example. If optics are a defining feature of shouldered weapons. Also pretty sure my deagle weighs more than most AR pistols. And it has a scope base on it. And it's .50 caliber. I mean, it's basically a destructive device ain't it?
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-09-21, 09:13
Something I just thought about. This paves the way for them to start nitpicking firearms without braces, too. Like RDS on handguns, for example. If optics are a defining feature of shouldered weapons. Also pretty sure my deagle weighs more than most AR pistols. And it has a scope base on it. And it's .50 caliber. I mean, it's basically a destructive device ain't it?
It’s hard to be anti-accurate guns, plus there is an ADA angle with red dots. I do think that the point system is where they want to go with restricting ARs. It makes is much more opaque to say that you are only allowing so many points, rather than banning guns. Fits in with their narrative of ‘weapons of war’. Plus they can go after add-ons, I won’t say much more. Could also be used for ‘sniper rifles’.
Then there is ‘constructive intent’? If you take the brace off, but still have it? Take a brace of and have a carbine receiver extension and you have an extra stock around, is that an SBR by intent?
America was not founded on permission.
It won’t survive on permission either.
I don't have to be actively non-compliant if this becomes the law of the land. This is so confusing I will never be confident if I am or am not in compliance.
Andy
I don't have to be actively non-compliant if this becomes the law of the land. This is so confusing I will never be confident if I am or am not in compliance.
Andy
That’s the real intent of these folks, make things so confusing and pass so many laws, pen so much BS that they can make a criminal out of anyone they wish to target and ruin them at will.
It’s not just with anti gun laws either.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-09-21, 10:05
Something I just thought about. This paves the way for them to start nitpicking firearms without braces, too. Like RDS on handguns, for example. If optics are a defining feature of shouldered weapons. Also pretty sure my deagle weighs more than most AR pistols. And it has a scope base on it. And it's .50 caliber. I mean, it's basically a destructive device ain't it?
The type of points system being proposed could be unleashed on anything.
While I don't support infringement, an alternate path would have been for the ATF to simply state that arm braces were intended for handicapped shooters. To avoid abuse of ATF's favorable ruling on braces, the equivalent of a handicapped parking permit is required. Done.
During the past few years that braces have become more popular, I have yet to see one at the rifle club used as an arm brace. We do have a member with a partial-arm birth defect. He shoots a standard rifle just fine.
Diamondback
06-09-21, 10:12
That’s the real intent of these folks, make things so confusing and pass so many laws, pen so much BS that they can make a criminal out of anyone they wish to target and ruin them at will.
It’s not just with anti gun laws either.
Wasn't that in Orwell's 1984? "When you don't have enough criminals, you make more." Thinking the current legal system is meant to be complied with and protect us is your mistake; it's meant as a Kafkaesque farce where they can take anyone they choose at any time for whatever reason plays best on the propaganda channels.
"Show me the man and I'll show you the crime."--Beria
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-09-21, 12:51
The type of points system being proposed could be unleashed on anything.
While I don't support infringement, an alternate path would have been for the ATF to simply state that arm braces were intended for handicapped shooters. To avoid abuse of ATF's favorable ruling on braces, the equivalent of a handicapped parking permit is required. Done.
During the past few years that braces have become more popular, I have yet to see one at the rifle club used as an arm brace. We do have a member with a partial-arm birth defect. He shoots a standard rifle just fine.
I can get a doctors note just fine...
I made sure that when I got a brace, that I could actually operate it as such. Actually a neat bit of kit.
ViperTwoSix
06-09-21, 12:52
Something I just thought about. This paves the way for them to start nitpicking firearms without braces, too. Like RDS on handguns, for example. If optics are a defining feature of shouldered weapons. Also pretty sure my deagle weighs more than most AR pistols. And it has a scope base on it. And it's .50 caliber. I mean, it's basically a destructive device ain't it?
This was one of my thoughts… it’s a test case for confiscation. There is no grandfather clause, so options are permanently alter the brace/weapon, destroy it, turn it in to the ATF, or register it under NFA. This is exactly the route Beto O’rouke was talking about with his planned “assault weapons” confiscation plan. If this works out for them, what’s next on the list of items already owned by millions that could be up for confiscation?
dontshakepandas
06-09-21, 12:56
There is no grandfather clause, so options are permanently alter the brace/weapon, destroy it, turn it in to the ATF, or register it under NFA.
I know I'll be sending my brace to the ATF so that it doesn't end up in the hands of a dangerous criminal! I also want to make sure that it doesn't get damaged on the way there so I'll pack it safely in 5 lbs of the finest cut glitter that I can find.
ViperTwoSix
06-09-21, 12:57
This. This is the argument we need to be making. If braced "pistols" are SBRs, then we already have millions of unregistered SBRs in the wild, and have for years (not to mention the ones with actual stocks on them). If they were a real problem, we would know about it by now.
This is a good point. The pistol brace rule isn’t about preventing gun violence, it’s about the government being mad it’s not getting its $200 per brace cut on those millions.
ViperTwoSix
06-09-21, 13:03
Is there a threshold number for common use? And how would common use apply in context of regulating something that had previously not been regulated (half million bump stocks) or things currently regulated (1.5m suppressors)?
I’m not sure there is really a threshold. The logic used in the recent federal court ruling on CA’s AWB was, in layman’s terms, Ford F150’s are a common truck. There are twice as many ARs as Ford F150s, so ARs are considered in common use. The judge actually used this analogy but with more detailed facts and actual sales numbers comparing the two.
Gabriel556
06-09-21, 13:19
I got an email from FPC saying the review period opened but I can not find it anywhere on the registrar site to comment. This is the document number if you need it. 2021-12176
NoveskeFan
06-09-21, 13:58
I got an email from FPC saying the review period opened but I can not find it anywhere on the registrar site to comment. This is the document number if you need it. 2021-12176
It should become available tomorrow.
https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/alcohol-tobacco-firearms-and-explosives-bureau
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-09-21, 15:00
I'd like to put the ATF on a points system...
I'd like to put the ATF on a points system...
I’d like to see the atf abolished and every agent that works for them tried for treason.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://youtu.be/B9AsUDAgd28
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The_War_Wagon
06-09-21, 15:48
So what’s the prize for getting the highest score?
A nickel in Attica? :rolleyes:
I don't have to be actively non-compliant if this becomes the law of the land. This is so confusing I will never be confident if I am or am not in compliance.
Andy
That's probably like 50% of gun owners in California now.
This was one of my thoughts… it’s a test case for confiscation. There is no grandfather clause, so options are permanently alter the brace/weapon, destroy it, turn it in to the ATF, or register it under NFA. This is exactly the route Beto O’rouke was talking about with his planned “assault weapons” confiscation plan. If this works out for them, what’s next on the list of items already owned by millions that could be up for confiscation?
Yea and I haven't heard anything else about giving those people a free stamp either. Almost makes you wonder if this is more of a revenue issue. If they can collect 200 dollars for every pistol out there, that would be quite the fundraiser for the federal government. If they can say that bumpstocks are machineguns, it seems like it would be pretty easy to say everything else is an SBR and must be registered now.
It's like that one dude was saying, people won't know if they're compliant or not. But you pay that little tax and that's the only way to know for sure. So even if you just have a stock 1911, better pay the tax just to be on the safe side. Cause maybe your target sights are a little too "accurate."
I'd like to put the ATF on a points system...
So show of hands... who can tell me what insidious piece of legislation allows ATF to create point systems that qualify firearms as acceptable or not acceptable?
I’d like to see the atf abolished and every agent that works for them tried for treason.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Now that they come under DOJ rather than Dept of Treasury, never happen. And we all remember what President did that right?
So, just did a quick tally on my truck gun…
Meets the two prerequisites. Total between the two sections was 11; 6, then 5. And that was guessing on the LOP… worst case, add another point there.
That was fun…
Only pistol I think will not be an issue would be the M&P 15-22 pistol… being it is under 4 pounds (doesn’t meet the prerequisites). Or people pushing the OAL out to 26”, and making it a firearm (can put a vertical grip on that for clear measure it is a firearm).
But seriously, if we are considering braces stocks, doesn’t that go back to how we measure OAL on rifles? Measured unfolded. I mean we are going back on how may ATF letters, why not that one, as well? Oh, I remember… we aren’t the ones making the rules as we go.
Can’t wait to see how many responses get submitted this time. Maybe we can have it pulled again.
Diamondback
06-09-21, 20:51
So show of hands... who can tell me what insidious piece of legislation allows ATF to create point systems that qualify firearms as acceptable or not acceptable?
We've discussed this before, but let's see if anybody else knows. :)
Hint, not NFA but another TLA...
So show of hands... who can tell me what insidious piece of legislation allows ATF to create point systems that qualify firearms as acceptable or not acceptable?
German weapon law of March 18, 1938.
Now that they come under DOJ rather than Dept of Treasury, never happen. And we all remember what President did that right?
Bush 2.0 if I am not mistaken?
I don’t care who it is though. If you are knowingly and willingly violating the constitution as written, you are a traitor and deserve to be treated as such.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So show of hands... who can tell me what insidious piece of legislation allows ATF to create point systems that qualify firearms as acceptable or not acceptable?
Ooh ooh pick me
If it has a rifle sight or not, you get a point.
It’s like Oprah.
You get get a point. You get a point. Everyone gets a point!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-10-21, 00:02
This is a good point. The pistol brace rule isn’t about preventing gun violence, it’s about the government being mad it’s not getting its $200 per brace cut on those millions.
Money, they print it. They don’t want any attention on NFA items. People start looking at the fact that NFA items aren’t ever used in crimes- that machine guns, SBRs, and suppressors - the most evil or evil guns aren’t a problem- and the whole gun control argument just gets one more level closer to absurdity. All these “SBRs” and lack of crime can’t continue to thumb its nose at the gun law tautology.
Diamondback
06-10-21, 00:49
Money, they print it. They don’t want any attention on NFA items. People start looking at the fact that NFA items aren’t ever used in crimes- that machine guns, SBRs, and suppressors - the most evil or evil guns aren’t a problem- and the whole gun control argument just gets one more level closer to absurdity. All these “SBRs” and lack of crime can’t continue to thumb its nose at the gun law tautology.
I'd bet we see more sex crimes committed by politicians/gov crats than violent crimes with braced pistols, and by their logic they should all be required to chop their Johnsons off upon taking the oath. After all, "if it prevents just ONE violent crime"...
Money, they print it. They don’t want any attention on NFA items. People start looking at the fact that NFA items aren’t ever used in crimes- that machine guns, SBRs, and suppressors - the most evil or evil guns aren’t a problem- and the whole gun control argument just gets one more level closer to absurdity. All these “SBRs” and lack of crime can’t continue to thumb its nose at the gun law tautology.
True, but they're limited by how much they can raise in taxes to pay the interest on the debt. If people see them printing way more money than they could ever raise enough taxes to pay the interest on...well, really bad things happen.
They're now waking up to the fact that they're gonna have to print a whole lotta money in the near future, so they're scrambling to find every tax dollar they can, and I would not even doubt for one second that they're looking at that 200 dollar NFA tax and thinking how can we milk that. If they can get virtually every gun in the NFA then that's a bunch of money into their coffers.
Bush 2.0 if I am not mistaken?
I don’t care who it is though. If you are knowingly and willingly violating the constitution as written, you are a traitor and deserve to be treated as such.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yep, everyone wants to blame the D's but R's have a big hand in the game too.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-10-21, 07:05
Money, they print it. They don’t want any attention on NFA items. People start looking at the fact that NFA items aren’t ever used in crimes- that machine guns, SBRs, and suppressors - the most evil or evil guns aren’t a problem- and the whole gun control argument just gets one more level closer to absurdity. All these “SBRs” and lack of crime can’t continue to thumb its nose at the gun law tautology.
Gun-grabbers use the same argument to suggest that NFA regulation effectively prevents criminal use of the most evil of guns.
Biden's gun-grab playbook:
* Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
-------
Unfortunately, it's probably an effective argument among the uninformed... Heavily regulated firearms = rarely used in crime = head nod.
Yep, everyone wants to blame the D's but R's have a big hand in the game too.
Bush was a global elitist. Hell Reagan gave us the gca. All politicians fear the citizenry having weapons
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NoveskeFan
06-10-21, 08:22
Commenting has opened:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces
https://www.regulations.gov/document/ATF-2021-0002-0001
Edit: I wasn't sure if you had to leave comments at both places, looks like the confirmations for both are from Regulations.GOV and you only need to comment on one or the other.
The_War_Wagon
06-10-21, 08:24
I'd like to put the ATF on a points system...
ANYONE who was at Ruby Ridge or Waco, goes STRAIGHT to Guantanamo. :mad:
Commenting has opened:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces
https://www.regulations.gov/document/ATF_FRDOC_0001-0045
Edit: I wasn't sure if you had to leave comments at both places, looks like the confirmations are from Regulations.GOV, so probably only need to comment at the second link.
Follow the first link, button is at the top right.
Gun-grabbers use the same argument to suggest that NFA regulation effectively prevents criminal use of the most evil of guns.
Biden's gun-grab playbook:
* Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
-------
Unfortunately, it's probably an effective argument among the uninformed... Heavily regulated firearms = rarely used in crime = head nod.
Yeah, nothing like having legally purchased and owned firearms and paying $200 + the application to make them legal again. That's going to go over real well.
Gabriel556
06-10-21, 10:59
Commented and forwarded to friends as well.
Ned Christiansen
06-10-21, 11:01
Ditto and on the "gonna start s/n-ing uppers insteada lowers" one too.
everready73
06-10-21, 11:21
I did my own response, but if anyone wants a copy pasta I will copy one below. I didn't write this, but the more responses hte better if everyone could comment!
"Regulating firearms with attached stabilizing arms braces is entirely needless and serves no purpose other than to burden law abiding citizens. The document clearly states, “As the purpose of the NFA is ‘to regulate certain weapons likely to be used for criminal purposes...’” There is no reason to believe braced firearms are likely to be used for criminal purposes. Since the ATF approved the first stabilizing brace in 2012, there has not been any notable spike in homicide, violent crime, or crime in general. There is not a correlation, let alone a causal link between the presence of braced firearms and higher crime rates. There is no evidence to suggest that regulating braced firearms under the NFA will reduce crime rates in any way. There is no evidence to suggest the average American will be safer by subjecting braced firearms within the purview of the NFA. There is, however, a clear burden that will be placed on the millions of American citizens who currently possess braced firearms. They will have to fill out lengthy paperwork and submit sensitive personal information for the permission to keep the property they have lawfully purchased.
The proposal in the document further appears to be entirely unenforceable in its current state. We can use the somewhat-similar example of the 2018 “bump-stock” ban as a case study. It was estimated that 280,000-520,000 bump-stocks were in circulation at the time of the ban. While it does not appear a conclusive figure was determined, it appears that, at most, a few thousand bump-stocks were surrendered, abandoned, of destroyed in compliance with the ATF’s new ruling on the device. If we are generous, and say that only 280,000 bump-stocks existed, the elimination of 3,000 bump-stocks from the hands of citizens would mean that the bump-stock ban only succeeded in getting .71% of bump-stocks off of the streets. This massive ban resulted in less than 1% of the existing devices being removed from circulation. What evidence is there to suggest stricter regulations on stabilizing braces will be any more effective? While there is no definitive figure for the number of stabilizing braces in circulation, it is known that at least 700,000 of one model of brace have been made. It is reasonable to assume that this figure is supplemented by the dozens of other types of stabilizing braces. Meaning there are likely millions of stabilizing braces in existence today. How does the ATF possibly intend to enforce the mandatory registration of these braces, should a given braced firearm be determined to be an SBR? It appears that the ATF is setting itself up for a tremendous failure, while simultaneously expending vast resources that would be far better used to combat crime that may actually endanger the lives of American citizens.
This proposed regulation also appear to attempt to skirt around District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 and United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174. With millions of braced firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens, it is evident that braced firearms are both in “common use” and used for “lawful purposes.” An explanation the ATF could offer as to what their defense will be when these regulations are taken to court would be appreciated.
Additionally, the selected set of “objective design features” appears to be anything but objective. There is not one single guideline which is clear established in anything resembling an objective manner. The guidelines are entirely subjective, arbitrary, and nonsensical. If a subjective human being, a Firearms Enforcement Officer, is making these determinations, then these “design features” are, by definition, not “objective.” Up to this point, all evidence points to the fact that the ATF has made subjective, arbitrary decisions with little rhyme or reason. In order to convince the public this is no longer the case, clearly defined factors would have to be established. This attempt of the ATF to clarify their position has only increased confusion.
The ATF has accomplished nothing with these guidelines other than turn millions of Americans into Schrodinger’s felon; individuals who possess a braced firearm both are and are not in possession of an illegal SBR, and they won’t be able to tell which it is until they submit it for evaluation, which they are not required to do in the first place. For the above listed reasons, I hereby request that the ATF clarify its positions further, and establish specific, objective standards by which stabilizing braces and the firearms they are attached to are to be measured. I would further request that the ATF immediately desists from taking action against citizens who have, or in the future will, purchase stabilizing arm braces. Further regulation on these devices serves no public interest, while simultaneously depriving law-abiding citizens of their right to possess the firearm of their choosing.
Gun-grabbers use the same argument to suggest that NFA regulation effectively prevents criminal use of the most evil of guns.
Biden's gun-grab playbook:
* Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
-------
Unfortunately, it's probably an effective argument among the uninformed... Heavily regulated firearms = rarely used in crime = head nod.
They obviously haven't talked to the Jasper county sheriff's department. The methbillies down there love their MGs, and they have no problem getting them either.
Diamondback
06-10-21, 13:06
A guy over at NWFA's comment, shared as a springboard for your own ideas:
“The proposed criteria is a form of government-sanctioned disablism in nature. Pistol braces are meant to aid those in shooting a pistol one-handed who would otherwise have immense difficulty in doing so. When pistol braces were made it was a blessing to the physically disabled and frail community, as it reduced barriers to their practicing of the second amendment. Braces give increased access to means of self-defense, thereby making vulnerable populations less likely to be victimized. This proposal reverses that liberation in a needlessly confusing manner. The criteria grading sheet is not clear, logical, concise or easily accessible for the average American. With over 3 million braces in circulation this proposed criteria could result in an already vulnerable population being subjected to oppressive government overreach. This overreach can land an otherwise well-meaning vulnerable individual in prison with a felony. The grading criteria is highly subjective and not easily enforceable given the sheer number of braces in circulation. I imagine it will only be a matter of time before the ADA gets involved in opposition of this discriminatory proposal which only targets otherwise law-abiding disabled or frail Americans, by impeding on their second amendment rights. It is not the government's place to dictate specific uses of equipment intended to aid a physically disabled/vulnerable individual in practicing his second amendment right. I.e. an individual adjusting for length of pull, does not mean they are circumventing the NFA, but rather making the firearm more comfortable and safe to fire dependent on that individual's physique. Additionally, placing an income-barrier in the form of a $200 tax stamp on top of the already costly means of self-defense, would be oppressive in nature towards vulnerable populations this product was intended for. “
I donated 500$ to FPC. I’m all done with the NRA, bunch of self serving fudds.
I’m also going submit a comment. More defending voices the better. I’ll make sure mine is more articulate than I’d imagine some will be.
My big concern here is less braces and more the precedent set here. The end goal is semi auto rifles. This is where we need to draw the line. If the ATF simply wanted to outlaw new braces being made and sold, but grandfather the old ones I’d just say ‘it’s been nice’ and that I’d expected it. This approach they are taking is different.
I donated 500$ to FPC. I’m all done with the NRA, bunch of self serving fudds.
I’m also going submit a comment. More defending voices the better. I’ll make sure mine is more articulate than I’d imagine some will be.
My big concern here is less braces and more the precedent set here. The end goal is semi auto rifles. This is where we need to draw the line. If the ATF simply wanted to outlaw new braces being made and sold, but grandfather the old ones I’d just say ‘it’s been nice’ and that I’d expected it. This approach they are taking is different.
Spot on, for all points.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-10-21, 14:02
Yeah, nothing like having legally purchased and owned firearms and paying $200 + the application to make them legal again. That's going to go over real well.
Lost in all this are the folks who are truly handicapped and benefit from an arm brace. They would be subject to all the worksheet points bs if this proposal is implemented, though I have doubts it will. It's like trying to regulate the type of car that can be parked in a handicapped parking space instead of issuing parking permits to handicapped drivers.
3 or 4 million gun owners should just let it be known they are no longer concerned with the legality of their assault weapons.
ViniVidivici
06-10-21, 15:22
3 or 4 million gun owners should just let it be known they are no longer concerned with the legality of their assault weapons.
Amen.
Your avatar is more and more relevant every day, BTW.
It would seem that if someone actually benefits from the intended purpose of the arm brace, the ATF is "implying" that they can stamp it and continue using the brace, right? As if the brace was simply a workaround for a no-stamp SBR. I didn't think the brace was being banned outright but to re-classify the AR pistol in order to downgrade brace usage for non-disabled folks. I mean given a choice, I think everyone would rather use a real stock. At least I would.
Lost in all this are the folks who are truly handicapped and benefit from an arm brace. They would be subject to all the worksheet points bs if this proposal is implemented, though I have doubts it will. It's like trying to regulate the type of car that can be parked in a handicapped parking space instead of issuing parking permits to handicapped drivers.
.....
As for the revenue angle, I'm not buying it. Not completely. Government needs billions to service a debt of trillions. A one time $200 tax (per unit) is peanuts. This is nothing more than setting a precedent for how they will ban everything effective for defense. To me, this is the tipping point that will certainly draw a line in the sand for all responsible gun owners who enjoy this wonderful FOW.
3 or 4 million gun owners should just let it be known they are no longer concerned with the legality of their assault weapons.
Amen.
Your avatar is more and more relevant every day, BTW.
Right on.
Diamondback
06-10-21, 20:46
Aero Precision's take in an email they just sent out:
"We could talk about this worksheet all day, but one of the most concerning parts of this whole thing is one of the first sentences on the top of the page. It reads "The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reserve the right to preclude classification as a pistol with a "stabilizing braces" for any firearm that achieves an apparent qualifying score but is an attempt to make a "short-barreled rifle" and circumvent the GCA or NFA." So basically this whole worksheet is just smoke and mirrors and if passed, whether or not you are breaking the law is up to the discretion of a federal agent.
Please leave a comment opposing this proposed legislation. We need to fight back and make every one of our voices heard. The effects this could potentially have on the firearms industry and community could be devastating."
Aero Precision's take in an email they just sent out:
"We could talk about this worksheet all day, but one of the most concerning parts of this whole thing is one of the first sentences on the top of the page. It reads "The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reserve the right to preclude classification as a pistol with a "stabilizing braces" for any firearm that achieves an apparent qualifying score but is an attempt to make a "short-barreled rifle" and circumvent the GCA or NFA." So basically this whole worksheet is just smoke and mirrors and if passed, whether or not you are breaking the law is up to the discretion of a federal agent.
Please leave a comment opposing this proposed legislation. We need to fight back and make every one of our voices heard. The effects this could potentially have on the firearms industry and community could be devastating."
That and push for nullification on a state level. You know, when California legalized weed, I was like that's NEVER going to happen here. Welp, not only did it happen, but I think people here might actually love their weed more than the cali folk now. It's really quite shocking to see how they've embraced it.
So if we red states nullify NFA laws, I imagine the folks in Cali and NY will be saying, Oh that could never happen here. Then they wake up ten years later and see a machinegun store on every street corner.
Topic is in the title.
https://youtu.be/_mrlWg0Fjog
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-10-21, 21:59
3 or 4 million gun owners should just let it be known they are no longer concerned with the legality of their assault weapons.
15 million is the ante. That is how many illlegals it took for the US to give up on real enforcement.
If you want to submit a comment about the proposed ATF changes regarding braces, the link below will take you right to a page that you can make and submit a comment. Very quick and easy.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces?trk_msg=PAH4LD95K6D4R99SLN5DMKCSC8&trk_contact=UNSHO9HI7866P2RL9F7D6THC30&trk_sid=E0K5RRBFV6J2QBBR2T1PNKOEMC&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Leave+Your+Comment&utm_campaign=General+Marketing+Email+-+Aero+ATF+Pistol+Brace+Comment+06.10.21#open-comment
Bush was a global elitist. Hell Reagan gave us the gca. All politicians fear the citizenry having weapons
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you mean the Gun Control Act of 1968, that wasn't Reagan. But Reagan did give us the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 which removed many parts of the 1968 GCA.
Ended the requirement of dealers to log ammunition sales and maintain a bound book.
Stated that collectors could make a favorable sale or trade without being considered firearms dealers.
Allowed the importation of surplus military firearms.
Allowed the transportation of firearms through states where they would be legal if the destination state allowed them. Obviously NY and CA have been violating this provision HARD.
Permitted ammunition to be shipped directly to customers homes without going through a dealer.
And although it DID close the registration for new domestic machine guns, most people don't know that the first machine gun ban happened back in 1968 when they ended the registry of any new foreign machine guns for transfer to non dealers.
And finally, the alternative versions, The Hughes - Rodino Bill wanted to close the entire NFA registry for everything...machine guns, SBRs, suppressors...all of it but without a grandfather clause. That meant if you owned it in 1986 you were the last owner and couldn't transfer, sell or trade it to anyone and almost nobody alive today would own anything NFA.
FOPA 86 was also the last time ANYTHING was removed from the 1968 GCA and it would have been unlikely for any other president to do so. Bush 41 would simply have closed the NFA registry along with the 89 import ban. Clinton would have simply closed the registry as part of his 94 AW ban and Bush 43 would have done it because he was just a F'ing idiot.
Aside from expanding conceal carry states, Reagan is the only President who fought to regain lost rights and won.
broberts001
06-11-21, 04:37
Comments left.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-11-21, 09:27
It would seem that if someone actually benefits from the intended purpose of the arm brace, the ATF is "implying" that they can stamp it and continue using the brace, right? As if the brace was simply a workaround for a no-stamp SBR. I didn't think the brace was being banned outright but to re-classify the AR pistol in order to downgrade brace usage for non-disabled folks. I mean given a choice, I think everyone would rather use a real stock. At least I would.
Anyone (except prohibited persons) can stamp a SBR. Nothing in this bs points scheme changes that, brace or stock, handicapped or not.
This began as an ATF accommodation for handicapped shooters that morphed into a free-for-all end-run around SBR tax stamp requirement. ATF has only themselves to blame with their flip-flop shouldering determinations. If this proposal was to go into effect, it would be erasing the original accommodation intended to help those with physical limitations. Accommodation for those with limited physical abilities should remain. Actually, the NFA needs repealing but that's outside of this narrowly focused discussion.
I copied and pasted the two suggested comments that people left in this thread into an email and sent it to 64 people on my contact list along with the link to the page itself. Will take all of about a minute to leave the comment. Of course I left one myself and am looking on GOA's site for a pony for the "frame or receiver" one while it's still open also. it only had 46,xxx comments as of yesterday, WTF? There should be millions, if for no other reason than to give the cockbags at ATF a moment of pause to think if they really want to ride this train...
And in the spirit of this thread, I ordered another pistol brace from SB: Product Quantity Price SBA4 - Black 1
I like the looks better than my SBA3
ViniVidivici
06-11-21, 14:05
And in the spirit of this thread, I ordered another pistol brace from SB: Product Quantity Price SBA4 - Black 1
I like the looks better than my SBA3
This is the way.
brickboy240
06-11-21, 14:40
...and I ordered another upper for my barren PSA AR-9 lower.
Eff the laws...I want another 9mm shorty to play around with and these rulings are just too vague to decipher.
Build now and beg for forgiveness later - that is my policy. LOL
...and I ordered another upper for my barren PSA AR-9 lower.
Eff the laws...I want another 9mm shorty to play around with and these rulings are just too vague to decipher.
Build now and beg for forgiveness later - that is my policy. LOL
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210611/c512bf197bf44bfdc55d9ee92aefb9b5.jpg
I had to modify some here, but still gave myself a good laugh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BangBang77
06-11-21, 16:19
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210611/c512bf197bf44bfdc55d9ee92aefb9b5.jpg
I had to modify some here, but still gave myself a good laugh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wish we had a like button. Well played sir.
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-11-21, 22:17
If you mean the Gun Control Act of 1968, that wasn't Reagan. But Reagan did give us the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 which removed many parts of the 1968 GCA.
Ended the requirement of dealers to log ammunition sales and maintain a bound book.
Stated that collectors could make a favorable sale or trade without being considered firearms dealers.
Allowed the importation of surplus military firearms.
Allowed the transportation of firearms through states where they would be legal if the destination state allowed them. Obviously NY and CA have been violating this provision HARD.
Permitted ammunition to be shipped directly to customers homes without going through a dealer.
And although it DID close the registration for new domestic machine guns, most people don't know that the first machine gun ban happened back in 1968 when they ended the registry of any new foreign machine guns for transfer to non dealers.
And finally, the alternative versions, The Hughes - Rodino Bill wanted to close the entire NFA registry for everything...machine guns, SBRs, suppressors...all of it but without a grandfather clause. That meant if you owned it in 1986 you were the last owner and couldn't transfer, sell or trade it to anyone and almost nobody alive today would own anything NFA.
FOPA 86 was also the last time ANYTHING was removed from the 1968 GCA and it would have been unlikely for any other president to do so. Bush 41 would simply have closed the NFA registry along with the 89 import ban. Clinton would have simply closed the registry as part of his 94 AW ban and Bush 43 would have done it because he was just a F'ing idiot.
Aside from expanding conceal carry states, Reagan is the only President who fought to regain lost rights and won.
This is an excellent summation and I appreciate it. I am sick of the "Reagan was a big gun grabber" narrative being parroted by the "I would have defeated the nazis and ended slavery myself" clowns these days. People are living in fantasy land.
If you mean the Gun Control Act of 1968, that wasn't Reagan. But Reagan did give us the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 which removed many parts of the 1968 GCA.
Ended the requirement of dealers to log ammunition sales and maintain a bound book.
Stated that collectors could make a favorable sale or trade without being considered firearms dealers.
Allowed the importation of surplus military firearms.
Allowed the transportation of firearms through states where they would be legal if the destination state allowed them. Obviously NY and CA have been violating this provision HARD.
Permitted ammunition to be shipped directly to customers homes without going through a dealer.
And although it DID close the registration for new domestic machine guns, most people don't know that the first machine gun ban happened back in 1968 when they ended the registry of any new foreign machine guns for transfer to non dealers.
And finally, the alternative versions, The Hughes - Rodino Bill wanted to close the entire NFA registry for everything...machine guns, SBRs, suppressors...all of it but without a grandfather clause. That meant if you owned it in 1986 you were the last owner and couldn't transfer, sell or trade it to anyone and almost nobody alive today would own anything NFA.
FOPA 86 was also the last time ANYTHING was removed from the 1968 GCA and it would have been unlikely for any other president to do so. Bush 41 would simply have closed the NFA registry along with the 89 import ban. Clinton would have simply closed the registry as part of his 94 AW ban and Bush 43 would have done it because he was just a F'ing idiot.
Aside from expanding conceal carry states, Reagan is the only President who fought to regain lost rights and won.
I was not aware of any of this. I was born in 1992, so this is all way before my time. I've heard/read opinions from older conservatives who still love Reagan to this day claiming he was a champion of gun rights, as well as plenty of opinions that blame him for the Hughes Amendment. This is thought provoking to say the least.
I'm reading through the text of the proposal now, and I gotta say... they did their homework. As much as we make fun of antis for knowing very little about guns, ("shoulder thing that goes up"), this is a different beast. I do not like it one bit.
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-12176/p-59
Stabilizing Support. To be effective, a “stabilizing brace” must provide support for the weapon through sufficient and stable contact with the shooter's forearm. Original “stabilizing brace” designs used a substantial amount of hardened material intended to contact a significant portion of the shooter's forearm, and a strap to secure the device and limit movement. Later iterations substantially reduced these design features, mimicking the outline of low-profile (i.e., slim design) shoulder stocks. These later designs resulted in less contact with the forearm and instead rely heavily upon a Velcro strap to perform the function of the more substantial flaps present in earlier designs. While the strap may be used to tighten the minimal polymer flaps on top of the arm, these later designs were far less effective at providing stabilizing support—in contrast to the originally stated intent—and increase bruising to the forearm when firing with one hand. These later designs were also similar to the tactical shoulder stocks widely advertised and sold in the marketplace.
Anyone (except prohibited persons) can stamp a SBR. Nothing in this bs points scheme changes that, brace or stock, handicapped or not.
That is not the case. There are several states where SBRs are illegal. Other states like Illinois have requirements like needing a C&R or a minimum OAL. Here in the Land of Lincoln, I can’t stamp my Scorpion Micro or my GHM45 because the OAL is less than the required 26”
This is an excellent summation and I appreciate it. I am sick of the "Reagan was a big gun grabber" narrative being parroted by the "I would have defeated the nazis and ended slavery myself" clowns these days. People are living in fantasy land.
The catch is Reagan was anti gun as shown by his stated support for the 94 semi auto ban, banning AP ammo, and signing the Mulford(fellow conservative Don Mulford) Act as CA governor.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-12-21, 10:10
That is not the case. There are several states where SBRs are illegal. Other states like Illinois have requirements like needing a C&R or a minimum OAL. Here in the Land of Lincoln, I can’t stamp my Scorpion Micro or my GHM45 because the OAL is less than the required 26”
I think most folks here know there are states that regulate firearms beyond the NFA or GCA. This discussion is about federal regulation.
Anyone (except prohibited persons) can stamp a SBR. Nothing in this bs points scheme changes that, brace or stock, handicapped or not.
That is not the case. There are several states where SBRs are illegal. Other states like Illinois have requirements like needing a C&R or a minimum OAL. Here in the Land of Lincoln, I can’t stamp my Scorpion Micro or my GHM45 because the OAL is less than the required 26”
You are exactly right. That fact, along with the travel paperwork for an SBR has got some hate sent Clint Smith's way for his recent negative comments on pistol braces exacerbated by his support for the Mossberg Shockwave.
Not to mention special taxes affecting rights are supposed to be verboten per the Minneapolis Star Tribune federal case.
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-12-21, 16:01
The catch is Reagan was anti gun as shown by his stated support for the 94 semi auto ban, banning AP ammo, and signing the Mulford(fellow conservative Don Mulford) Act as CA governor.
He was suffering from Alzheimer’s at that point. He was basically signing what Nancy and his handlers put in front of him—if he signed it at all.
Again, not perfect. But he also existed in a completely different gun culture than we do now. Without the rightward swing under Reagan I doubt we would have much more than shotguns and .22s by now.
He was suffering from Alzheimer’s at that point. He was basically signing what Nancy and his handlers put in front of him—if he signed it at all.
Again, not perfect. But he also existed in a completely different gun culture than we do now. Without the rightward swing under Reagan I doubt we would have much more than shotguns and .22s by now.
Mulford was 1967. He wasn't showing signs of Alzheimer's then and his actions on 2A issues in 1967 matches the same 2A actions he demonstrated from the mid 1980's till when he dropped out of public life
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
Diamondback
06-12-21, 16:29
He was suffering from Alzheimer’s at that point. He was basically signing what Nancy and his handlers put in front of him—if he signed it at all.
Again, not perfect. But he also existed in a completely different gun culture than we do now. Without the rightward swing under Reagan I doubt we would have much more than shotguns and .22s by now.
According to Michael, Sarah Brady preyed on Reagan's compassion for others, particularly her husband who took a bullet meant for him.
Meanwhile the marxist U.S. gov is escalating plans against its own people.
According to Michael, Sarah Brady preyed on Reagan's compassion for others, particularly her husband who took a bullet meant for him.
I have seen claims(seems like they were from one of the old American Survival Guide political article contributors) the Bradys were active in anti-2A groups by the early 1970's.
I have seen claims(seems like they were from one of the old American Survival Guide political article contributors) the Bradys were active in anti-2A groups by the early 1970's.
And in the meantime Punch Drunk Joe is pushing for an outright “assault weapons” and magazine ban while designating a gay bar a national memorial. So we have Gettysburg, Arlington, Mount Rushmore and The Pulse. Just when I think the crazies in DC cannot go any lower they prove me wrong.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-pulse-nightclub-national-memorial-gun-control-mass-shooting
Reagan is the reason that open carry is as messed up as it is in ca.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Diamondback
06-12-21, 19:47
I have seen claims(seems like they were from one of the old American Survival Guide political article contributors) the Bradys were active in anti-2A groups by the early 1970's.
And on the other hand, other sources say that before Hinckley turned him into a vegetable Jim Brady was a collector and NRA member. Lots of chaff out there, the hard part is finding the wheat--I'm inclined to give Michael Reagan some credence as the member of the family who didn't go Off The Rails.
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-12-21, 20:28
Mulford was 1967. He wasn't showing signs of Alzheimer's then and his actions on 2A issues in 1967 matches the same 2A actions he demonstrated from the mid 1980's till when he dropped out of public life
Just a completely different time and context. I agree it was a bad idea. We will just have to disagree about the rest. I will forever be grateful for what Ronald Reagan did for this country.
I was not aware of any of this. I was born in 1992, so this is all way before my time. I've heard/read opinions from older conservatives who still love Reagan to this day claiming he was a champion of gun rights, as well as plenty of opinions that blame him for the Hughes Amendment. This is thought provoking to say the least.
Regarding the Hughes Amendment, because it's important.
Line item vetos did not yet exist. It was all or nothing.
Reagan asked the NRA what he should do and they told him to sign it. The NRA and most gun owners were far more interested in cheap military surplus firearms than making domestic machine guns. Even when it was legal, people looked at transferable M-16s in 1985 that were only $200 more than an identical AR-15 model and they'd go "What the hell would I do with that?"
But the main thing it ended was Carter era ATF stings where they would set up at guns shows, sell popular guns at favorable prices and then UC agents would solicit buyers and offer them $50-75 above what they just paid and IF you sold the gun to them, you got arrested for "selling a gun for profit but without being a FFL." This was so common one of the first things people did at gun shows was figure out which table was the ATF scam table and try and warn as many people as possible.
FOPA 86 also allowed FFLs to sell at gun shows so before that it was all private sellers and buyers getting jammed up by ATF gun show stings.
The catch is Reagan was anti gun as shown by his stated support for the 94 semi auto ban, banning AP ammo, and signing the Mulford(fellow conservative Don Mulford) Act as CA governor.
Yeah, context is important. First he wasn't president in 94 and can do what he wants as a private citizen. But while President, even after being SHOT, he resisted all efforts of Handgun Control Inc. to recruit him or to sponsor their legislation. Name another President who did that. If he was anti gun as you suggest, certainly getting shot would have got him on the anti gun bandwagon.
He NEVER banned AP ammo. The 1968 GCA and the ATF was already doing that for him. As a consequence of 922r any handgun that can chamber a rifle round qualifies all AP ammo in that caliber as unsuitable for civilian use. Trying to blame that on Reagan is weak.
Now the Mulford Act he DID sign. It was about black panthers walking around with guns and intimidating the white folks who were DEMANDING that the governor do something about it, but he sure as shit did sign the Mulford Act. There was probably a better way and CA should have simply enforced their brandishing laws in the instances when it happened and not worried about a black man with a gun if he wasn't threatening you with it but as we know liberal CA people can be as racist as anyone else. So they demanded and got the Mulford Act. Reagan should have known better but he caved, but it wasn't because he was anti gun.
Btw, Bush campaigned on his promise to sign the renewal of the Clinton ban, does that make Bush 43 anti gun? Bush 41 banned all military style imports in 89 through an EO, does that make Bush 41 anti gun?
Seems like the last progun president we had was NRA life member John Kennedy. Of course Reagan was also a NRA life member. Bush 41 was a NRA life member but resigned his membership after they criticized the ATF at Waco. Bush 41 thought calling ATF "jack booted thugs" was more offensive than cooking children alive.
Yeah, context is important. First he wasn't president in 94 and can do what he wants as a private citizen. But while President, even after being SHOT, he resisted all efforts of Handgun Control Inc. to recruit him or to sponsor their legislation. Name another President who did that. If he was anti gun as you suggest, certainly getting shot would have got him on the anti gun bandwagon.
He NEVER banned AP ammo. The 1968 GCA and the ATF was already doing that for him. As a consequence of 922r any handgun that can chamber a rifle round qualifies all AP ammo in that caliber as unsuitable for civilian use. Trying to blame that on Reagan is weak.
Now the Mulford Act he DID sign. It was about black panthers walking around with guns and intimidating the white folks who were DEMANDING that the governor do something about it, but he sure as shit did sign the Mulford Act. There was probably a better way and CA should have simply enforced their brandishing laws in the instances when it happened and not worried about a black man with a gun if he wasn't threatening you with it but as we know liberal CA people can be as racist as anyone else. So they demanded and got the Mulford Act. Reagan should have known better but he caved, but it wasn't because he was anti gun.
Btw, Bush campaigned on his promise to sign the renewal of the Clinton ban, does that make Bush 43 anti gun? Bush 41 banned all military style imports in 89 through an EO, does that make Bush 41 anti gun?
Seems like the last progun president we had was NRA life member John Kennedy. Of course Reagan was also a NRA life member. Bush 41 was a NRA life member but resigned his membership after they criticized the ATF at Waco. Bush 41 thought calling ATF "jack booted thugs" was more offensive than cooking children alive.
Engaging in anti 2A actions does define a person as anti 2A which is how the Bush family rolls.
https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/statement-signing-bill-regulate-armor-piercing-ammunition
It seems once again, instead of uniting in the fight against the Fed making yet another move towards their end goal, confiscating our guns, we are fighting amongst ourselves. Not just here, but within the community at large.
Plenty of people are saying "braces are gay, and you were bending the law, they should be banned". Also the attitude "I bought a stamp, you should've just done that you fool"
And now we are once again bickering about a dead president who has not been relevant for years.
As usual, styer is right with his sporter clause preaching. That is the battle we need to win, but never will because most gun owners never heard of it.
Maybe when shotguns are on a point system we will finally get gun owners to unite.
Soli Deo Gloria
I don't remember who said it, but we hang together or we will all hang separately.
People it shouldn't matter who did what in the past when they were in the WH. It also shouldn't matter if you paid your $200 and went SBR, and you think people with braces are just trying to get over.
This is about government tyranny, nothing more and nothing less. As a community we should come together and fight this.
For if we lose this today, then tomorrow we will have a thread on SBR's or suppressors being banned.
It seems once again, instead of uniting in the fight against the Fed making yet another move towards their end goal, confiscating our guns, we are fighting amongst ourselves. Not just here, but within the community at large.
Plenty of people are saying "braces are gay, and you were bending the law, they should be banned". Also the attitude "I bought a stamp, you should've just done that you fool"
And now we are once again bickering about a dead president who has not been relevant for years.
As usual, styer is right with his sporter clause preaching. That is the battle we need to win, but never will because most gun owners never heard of it.
Maybe when shotguns are on a point system we will finally get gun owners to unite.
Soli Deo Gloria
Yup. I purge (figuratively) vocal opponents of pistol braces from my circle at this point.
It seems once again, instead of uniting in the fight against the Fed making yet another move towards their end goal, confiscating our guns, we are fighting amongst ourselves. Not just here, but within the community at large.
Plenty of people are saying "braces are gay, and you were bending the law, they should be banned". Also the attitude "I bought a stamp, you should've just done that you fool"
And now we are once again bickering about a dead president who has not been relevant for years.
As usual, styer is right with his sporter clause preaching. That is the battle we need to win, but never will because most gun owners never heard of it.
Maybe when shotguns are on a point system we will finally get gun owners to unite.
Soli Deo GloriaWell put. I fear as a whole we are too individualistic and/or law-appreciating to actually unite. It seems the other side can turn either off as it suits their agenda.
Dennis.
Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
Crime is surging in many US cities and there seems to be no plan.
Wonder the rise in violent crime is part of the marxist biden administrations strategy to push their anti gun agenda.
https://www.zububrothers.com/2021/06/09/weve-reached-our-breaking-point-dozens-of-baltimore-businesses-threaten-not-to-pay-taxes/
ChattanoogaPhil
06-13-21, 12:25
I don't care to dig up Reagan and beat him with the Mulford Act. However, while the NRA is still above dirt it's worthy to note that the NRA supported the Mulford Act. As noted earlier, it was more about controlling the black man than gun control per se. History is rife with such carry restrictions, particularly in the South.
Crime is surging in many US cities and there seems to be no plan.
Wonder the rise in violent crime is part of the marxist biden administrations strategy to push their anti gun agenda.
https://www.zububrothers.com/2021/06/09/weve-reached-our-breaking-point-dozens-of-baltimore-businesses-threaten-not-to-pay-taxes/
They've spent decades convincing black people that it's moral to steal from white people, and even hurt them if they resist, or maybe even if they don't. Racism is never okay, and people should be treated as individuals, but if you're a white person and you don't have a healthy respect for black people you're playing with fire.
So, I drafted my own comment and went to submit it, only to find that I'm 3300+ characters over the limit. I have an exam tomorrow evening so it'll be a couple days before I can work on it. After watching this video I'll probably head to GOA's website and combine their talking points with mine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUW4mwuN58Y
ViniVidivici
06-13-21, 22:46
And to push for federalization of LE.
Joke's on them. We dont call the cops.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-14-21, 17:51
Crime is surging in many US cities and there seems to be no plan.
Wonder the rise in violent crime is part of the marxist biden administrations strategy to push their anti gun agenda.
https://www.zububrothers.com/2021/06/09/weve-reached-our-breaking-point-dozens-of-baltimore-businesses-threaten-not-to-pay-taxes/
Through the state ending preemption of local gun laws, we are about to lose concealed carry here in Denver. Right as murder rate is skyrocketing.
There was a box article, that I won’t even like to, that said that part of the problem is the massive new number of guns being sold. They know it’s not true, so they don’t even say that is the major driver. They never quite draw the link between gun sales to legal gun owners, and the illegal guns that they are pulling off of people at higher rates than in past years. There have always been plenty of guns for bad guys to use. A few million more in the past 12 months doesn’t make a difference.
And to push for federalization of LE.
Joke's on them. We dont call the cops.
They want to turn the tables and put social justice warriors in cop uniforms, and then they want to do to the white people what they perceive is happening to Black people.
Diamondback
06-14-21, 19:37
They want to turn the tables and put social justice warriors in cop uniforms, and then they want to do to the white people what they perceive is happening to Black people.
Precisely, their dream is to dial up Brownshirts on the Wayback Machine, then Party Like It's November 1938 and get their Kristallnacht on. Hence the full-court press with the gun-bans and nominating a wannabe Heinrich Himmler to ATF... (Personal to the nominee: SUCK A DICK, CHIP!)
Only 36,714 comments so far...
ChattanoogaPhil
06-15-21, 11:19
36k comments in just 5 days is significant. There were only 36k bump stock comments for the entire period.
Thats because as a group, we are so stupid that we thought bumpstocks were a “necessary sacrifice”.
36k comments in just 5 days is significant. There were only 36k bump stock comments for the entire period.
36k comments in just 5 days is significant. There were only 36k bump stock comments for the entire period.
Ah; well good then; on the pistol brace front, not so much on the bumpstocks though.
I'm thinking, hypothetically of course, as we are on the wrong side of the political aisle to do anything actually uncomfortable in the way of showing our displeasure with injustice, that we should be using the lefty/democrat/media/BLM, but I repeat myself, playbook and doxing more people involved with the ATF, spray painting houses, throwing more stuff, setting fires; you know, "mostly peaceful protest" style as was demonstrated in the past year for how the populace should be dealing with ideas with which we do not agree. Oh, forgot mobbing any area or building where these decision makers will be working while having political representatives and the POTUS decry the proposal as unacceptable and state how none of us should accept any outcome that we don't like; dredging through any and all employees of said agency in order for pictures, quotes and other misc missteps to "resurface" in order to cause cancellation or at least embarrassment?
I believe mob rule has proven quite effective recently and since that's the standard that has now been set and used to great effect (see the Chauvin "trial" debacle). Meanwhile, back in the land of actual American values and norms, we all agree to go to the ATF website and write scathing comments that no one will ever read...
36k comments in just 5 days is significant. There were only 36k bump stock comments for the entire period.
Just commented and will continue to urge others to do so.
Diamondback
06-15-21, 13:34
Worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etTX99XastU
Worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etTX99XastU
I saw that, I think that they are doing a decent job of pointing out the hypocrisy of this whole thing.
36k comments in just 5 days is significant. There were only 36k bump stock comments for the entire period.
In December, we got 73,000 in five days…
In December, we got 73,000 in five days…
For what proposal?
For what proposal?
The first attempt of going after braces…
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/18/2020-27857/objective-factors-for-classifying-weapons-with-stabilizing-braces
ChattanoogaPhil
06-16-21, 08:09
Thats because as a group, we are so stupid that we thought bumpstocks were a “necessary sacrifice”.
Unfortunately, the NRA suffered the same thinking. About as insulting as it gets for the NRA to call to regulate bump stocks claiming they function like machine guns after the Obama admin had repeatedly issued favorable rulings.
For those who might have forgotten:
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20171005/nras-wayne-lapierre-and-chris-cox-issue-joint-statement
titsonritz
06-16-21, 17:52
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1ZliXcWkko
Only because I "talk" a lot about action but feel like there's not much I can actually do on these issues; I've been writing twice a day now to the NRA and NRA-ILA and will begin calling this afternoon imploring them to update their pages now that the comment section has been open since the 10th or so:
Our ILA pages need to be updated with the link and our 5 million members need to submit personal comments on the ATF "pistol brace" proposal. It's been open since the 10th and is only at about 60,000 comments. We should be over 4 million without a problem. It's past time that we, as the NRA, start throwing our weight around on EVERY anti-gun legislation, no matter how frivolous it might seem as giving even an inch is not acceptable. The slow boil that the anti-gun crowd is using on us is working and it has to stop. I implore you to push this out and express the importance to our members that it does matter and no new legislation will be tolerated. We always tout the fact that we have 5 million members but then we don't show up on these damn comment pages in numbers anywhere near this figure. It is inexcusable that we can't get millions of our members to take a moment and write a simple one paragraph opposing new regulations on any firearm related issue, most especially those that attack items already in common use.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces
I will get back after talking to someone on the phone to see what the response there will be...I mean come on, are we opposing anti-gun bullsh*t or are we just going to wait and whine about it after it happens...again?
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-house-bill-atf/2021/06/17/id/1025424/
Yes!! I hope it goes through.
Diamondback
06-17-21, 11:08
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-house-bill-atf/2021/06/17/id/1025424/
Yes!! I hope it goes through.
In *this* Congress about as likely as me knocking up a Playmate of the Year, but we still need to push it hard to keep the pressure on--and KEEP pushing it every year.
In *this* Congress about as likely as me knocking up a Playmate of the Year, but we still need to push it hard to keep the pressure on--and KEEP pushing it every year.
I agree, but you never know. For sure we need to keep pushing it every year and harder each time.
Whiskey_Bravo
06-17-21, 12:23
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-house-bill-atf/2021/06/17/id/1025424/
Yes!! I hope it goes through.
Probably wouldn't even get majority support with the do nothing repubs.
Diamondback
06-17-21, 12:51
Don't forget to comment on the Frame/Receiver grab too!
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/call-to-action-submit-your-comment-on-atfs-new-frame-or-receiver-rule-today/
Well at least MTG is doing something positive . I as for myself I contacted both my Senators (Moran & Marshall) concerning the pistol brace issue as well as the Chipman nomination. I also contacted my Congressman Mann about the brace issue. I then decided to join GOA and sent messages through them. Everyone of us needs to get on top of these overreaches by unelected bureaucrats.
Don't forget to comment on the Frame/Receiver grab too!
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/call-to-action-submit-your-comment-on-atfs-new-frame-or-receiver-rule-today/
Sent today also !
Diamondback
06-18-21, 15:52
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/655633256561115187/855549039533883402/6ztpok6cbj571-jpg.png
Pressingonward
06-20-21, 15:32
I've drafted a comment to submit regarding the proposed pistol brace rules. Posting it here ahead of time in case anyone has any suggestions to improve it before I submit (not that it's that critical to get it perfect - I don't think these comments will do a whole lot). It's somewhat rambling and far from succinct:
I am commenting today regarding ATF 2021R–08, “Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached ‘‘Stabilizing Braces’’”.
The proposed rules on stabilizing braces have the surface appearance of objectivity, but a closer examination shows them to be completely subjective and subject to the whims of the ATF on a case-by-case basis - this is a poor model for federal regulation that will lead to law-abiding citizens being charged as felons for weapons that have been perfectly legal by the formal written guidance of the ATF for years now.
A large number of the criteria in this proposed rule are subjective and dependent on a person’s unique physical stature. A disabled veteran who is a large person with large forearms may find it easier to shoot a pistol with a longer brace length than a smaller person, yet the criteria in this rule makes it illegal to increase that brace length to match a person’s unique physique. Similarly, they may purchase a “cuff type design” that may fully wrap around an average person’s forearm, but only partially wraps around their unusually large forearm – does that make them a felon? Almost every line item in your worksheet is vague and subjective, making it impossible for law-abiding citizens to be certain that they are in compliance with these regulations. This is far from objective.
The proposed rule claims that there can be no other use for attaching a brace to a lightweight pistol than to fire it from the shoulder, but this is simply not true. Braces are used in target pistol competitions to improve accuracy – this is hardly an unusual, dangerous or “gangster” application. The proposed rule would felonize a whole subset of competition shooters – a class of firearms use that is clearly and explicitly protected by the second amendment as has been made clear throughout the years in multiple court cases. The proposed rules would infringe on our rights to use pistol braces for legitimate sporting purposes.
In section II, Application of ATF Worksheet 4999, you specify that one point is for things that suggest that “the weapon could be fired from the shoulder,” however this description is outside the scope of the “the statutory definitions of ‘‘rifle’’ in the GCA and NFA [which] describe that type of weapon as one ‘‘intended to be fired from the shoulder.’’ There is a wide gulf between “could” and “intended” – I could if I really wanted to, shoot a Glock 19 or other small handgun from my shoulder, but that does not mean that a Glock 19 is intended to be fired from the shoulder. In the same way, just because an AR-type pistol could be fired from the shoulder doesn’t mean that it is intended to be fired from the shoulder, and the criteria in your worksheet fail to show any hint of intent, which is legally the only thing the ATF should be concerned with.
For example, a point is assigned if a weapon has “no sights” – how does not having sights change a weapon from a pistol into a rifle? This is absurd. What happens if a law-abiding citizen has a red-dot sight on their AR pistol, and they take it off to send it in for warranty repair? All the sudden, their legal AR-pistol gains another “point” on your worksheet, which may well lead to it being classified as a short barreled rifle, and turn them into a felon – simply from REMOVING a piece of hardware.
I could list out several more issues I have with the proposed ruling, but I’ll leave it with a broader point – the whole intent of the GCA and NFA is to protect law-abiding citizens. These proposed rules do NOTHING to accomplish that aim. Instead they do exactly the opposite – make millions of law-abiding pistol owners felons overnight due to abstract details of the kinds of plastic and rubber attached to their gun, while doing nothing to prevent crime. It is clear that the millions of AR-type pistols in common use in the USA are not “dangerous and unusual gangster-type weapons”, and if the ATF would like to reclassify these as short-barreled rifles, it therefore follows that short-barreled rifles are in common use – making the GCA and NFA constitutionally invalid. These regulations accomplish nothing of value and infringe on our rights as US citizens. I urge to withdraw the proposed rules on pistol stabilizing braces.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-23-21, 05:51
Good read:
https://www.primaryarms.com/atf-proposal-2021r05?trk_msg=6EBMJSRDV3G4TERL4Q66UCPRPC&trk_contact=4ERGAQ0HSHTHV6SR1C4OE2I2LO&trk_sid=QFMC8D509DJJIEVOT9H01Q0TDO&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=BUTTON_1&utm_campaign=21_06_AD22b_ATF-Ruling
Pressingonward
06-23-21, 08:41
That was a good summary, thanks for sharing
Good read:
https://www.primaryarms.com/atf-proposal-2021r05?trk_msg=6EBMJSRDV3G4TERL4Q66UCPRPC&trk_contact=4ERGAQ0HSHTHV6SR1C4OE2I2LO&trk_sid=QFMC8D509DJJIEVOT9H01Q0TDO&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=BUTTON_1&utm_campaign=21_06_AD22b_ATF-Ruling
So I guess anyone without a computer or phone doesn't get to be heard?
ChattanoogaPhil
06-24-21, 06:17
So I guess anyone without a computer or phone doesn't get to be heard?
---------
Included in post #200 is a link to ATF instructions for submitting comments. The way I read it as long as written comments are legible and at least 12-point font size (.17 inches) they should be accepted via US Mail. Computer printer, typewriter or pen in hand isn't stipulated, so I would guess the below is good to go regardless if it was computer printed or handwritten.
https://i.imgur.com/PuA3qHD.jpg
-----------
Submit a Comment on Proposed Rule 2021R-05
ATF requests comments on the proposed rule, Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms, from all interested persons.
ATF specifically requests comments on the feasibility of implementing the new definition of firearm “frame or receiver” in 27 CFR 478.11 and 27 CFR 479.11, and related definitions and amendments that ensure the proper marking, recordkeeping, and traceability of all firearms manufactured, imported, acquired and disposed by federal firearms licensees. ATF also requests comments on the costs or benefits of the proposed rule and on the appropriate methodology and data for calculating those costs and benefits.
Deadline
Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must be submitted on or before August 19, 2021.
Commenters should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket Management System will not accept comments after midnight Eastern Time on the last day of the comment period.
Requirements
All comments must reference this document’s docket number ATF 2021R-05, be legible, and include the commenter’s complete first and last name and full mailing address. ATF may not consider, or respond to, comments that do not meet these requirements or comments containing profanity.
ATF will retain all comments as part of this rulemakings administrative record. ATF will treat all comments as originals and will not acknowledge receipt of comments. In addition, if ATF cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, ATF may not be able to consider your comment.
ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before the closing date, and will give comments after that date the same consideration if practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before the closing date.
How to Submit
Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comment multiple times or by more than one method). Hand-delivered comments will not be accepted.
Federal eRulemaking Portal
ATF recommends that you submit your comments to ATF via the Federal eRulemaking portal at www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions.
Comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that is provided after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submit your comment online
The Regulations.gov comment portal is now live following the publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Register on May 21, 2021.
Mail
Written comments must appear in minimum 12-point font size (.17 inches), include the commenter’s first and last name and full mailing address, be signed, and may be of any length.
Send written comments to:
ATTN: ATF 2021R-05
Andrew Lange, Office of Regulatory Affairs
Enforcement Programs and Services
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
99 New York Ave. NE
Mail Stop 6N-518
Washington DC 20226
Fax
Faxed comments must:
Be legible and appear in minimum 12 point font size (.17 inches);
Be 8 ½” x 11” paper;
Be signed and contain the commenter’s complete first and last name and full mailing address; and
Be no more than five pages long.
Submit comments by facsimile transmission to (202) 648-9741.
Confidentiality
ATF will make all comments meeting the requirements outlined above, whether submitted electronically or on paper, available for public viewing at ATF and on the internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal, and subject to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).
Commenters who do not want their name or other personal identifying information posted on the internet should submit comments by mail or facsimile, along with a separate cover sheet containing their personal identifying information. Both the cover sheet and comment must reference this docket number (2021R-05). For comments submitted by mail or facsimile, information contained on the cover sheet will not appear when posted on the internet but any personal identifying information that appears within a comment will not be redacted by ATF and it will appear on the internet.
Proprietary or Confidential Business Information
A commenter may submit to ATF information identified as proprietary or confidential business information. The commenter shall place any portion of a comment that is proprietary or confidential business information under law on pages separate from the balance of the comment with each page prominently marked “PROPRIETARY OR CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION” at the top of the page.
ATF will not make proprietary or confidential business information submitted in compliance with these instructions available when disclosing the comments that it received, but will disclose that the commenter provided proprietary or confidential business information that ATF is holding in a separate file to which the public does not have access. If ATF receives a request to examine or copy this information, it will treat it as any other request under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). In addition, ATF will disclose such proprietary or confidential business information to the extent required by other legal process.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-24-21, 09:15
Only 36,714 comments so far...
103k for the first 14 days which is about on pace with the first five days.
According to the Congressional Research Service.... unofficial estimates suggest that there are between 10 and 40 million stabilizing braces and similar components already in civilian hands, either purchased as accessories or already attached to firearms made at home or at the factory.
It would appear that pistol brace owners haven't been rushing to the Comment button but there's still a lot of time till September.
I continue to contact GOA and NRA in that regard. Just takes a second to pen a quick comment like : Please focus your energies on criminals, their behavior and the crimes they are committing and stop the constant attack on the law-abiding gun owners in this country. Nearly everything the ATF puts out in recent memory is akin to putting muzzles on people before they enter a crowded theater in the event that someone might break the law and yell "fire." And yes it just that bad. The ATF should cease allowing itself to be the militant arm of the leftists in our country and refocus on criminals and criminality instead of working so hard to create felons with ever increasing infringements on the Constitution's second amendment. Pistol braces, like so many other firearm-related items are in common use in this country by millions of law-abiding citizens so please direct your efforts at those that actually break the laws, they're called criminals, in case you've forgotten that important point.
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-24-21, 23:40
Thankfully Republicans in the Senate seem to have noticed. https://thereload.com/exclusive-republican-senators-demand-withdraw-of-pistol-brace-ban-that-would-affect-millions/
Diamondback
06-25-21, 01:21
Thankfully Republicans in the Senate seem to have noticed. https://thereload.com/exclusive-republican-senators-demand-withdraw-of-pistol-brace-ban-that-would-affect-millions/
Except for Collins and Pussyass Portman.... Collins, I kinda get, Maine is split right down the middle between flaming Leftists and serious gun people so she has to walk a tightrope pissing each side off just enough to not be worth replacing. Portman... well, I have family who were part of the Ohio Republican Party at its founding, and it was corrupt even in their day when they were PART of the problem. Call my personal war on RINOs an attempt to atone for the sins of my forefathers, I guess...
ViniVidivici
06-25-21, 03:26
Oh, that's neat.....where were all those pieces of shiit when the election was being stolen, which is how we got to this point, right?
Bunch of weak swamp creature fuucks.
Oh, that's neat.....where were all those pieces of shiit when the election was being stolen, which is how we got to this point, right?
Bunch of weak swamp creature fuucks.
Only on tuesday but never on wednesday and sometimes on saturday but never after 4pm.
ChattanoogaPhil
06-25-21, 07:48
Forty-eight Republican senators signed a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday slamming the Biden Administration’s plan to ban most pistol braces.
Republican senators said the ATF made the devices popular by initially approving their design and then expanding their legal use in a 2017 determination. They accused the agency “suddenly chang[ing] course” on their legality after nearly a decade. They said the ATF’s turnabout was “shocking,” and accused it of trying to “yank the rug out from under” law-abiding American gun owners who have purchased upwards of 7 million of the devices.
--------
Did 48 'shocked' republican Senator's sign a letter slamming the Trump admin for 'suddenly changing course on [bump stock] legality after a decade' and 'yanked the rug out from under law-abiding citizens'?
Next I suppose the NRA will say they are shocked that additional regulations would even be considered on a device the ATF has already approved. shocking I tell ya... shocking.
---------
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
Forty-eight Republican senators signed a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday slamming the Biden Administration’s plan to ban most pistol braces.
Republican senators said the ATF made the devices popular by initially approving their design and then expanding their legal use in a 2017 determination. They accused the agency “suddenly chang[ing] course” on their legality after nearly a decade. They said the ATF’s turnabout was “shocking,” and accused it of trying to “yank the rug out from under” law-abiding American gun owners who have purchased upwards of 7 million of the devices.
--------
Did 48 'shocked' republican Senator's sign a letter slamming the Trump admin for 'suddenly changing course on [bump stock] legality after a decade' and 'yanked the rug out from under law-abiding citizens'?
Next I suppose the NRA will say they are shocked that additional regulations would even be considered on a device the ATF has already approved. shocking I tell ya... shocking.
---------
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
When bump stocks came under fire and the pro rights community (including far too many here) just didn’t care because bump stocks are “fudd”, Many people including myself warned others that it was opening Pandora’s box to just up and make a piece of plastic illegal and it would have enduring consequences.
Well, they’re gonna go after everything at a granular level now, it’s exactly what we get for not fighting every battle, together and instead letting each other hang separately because “I don’t use those stupid things” Types of attitudes.
Pistol braces are just the next thing, “ghost guns” are too. They won’t ease up even a little bit until people unite en masse.
It’s the same thing with pistol braces right now, look at the comments in this site- people just don’t get it!
When bump stocks came under fire and the pro rights community (including far too many here) just didn’t care because bump stocks are “fudd”, Many people including myself warned others that it was opening Pandora’s box to just up and make a piece of plastic illegal and it would have enduring consequences.
Well, they’re gonna go after everything at a granular level now, it’s exactly what we get for not fighting every battle, together and instead letting each other hang separately because “I don’t use those stupid things” Types of attitudes.
Pistol braces are just the next thing, “ghost guns” are too. They won’t ease up even a little bit until people unite en masse.
It’s the same thing with pistol braces right now, look at the comments in this site- people just don’t get it!Bingo.
Other gun boards were the same. Lots of people were in the....this is not the hill I'm dying on...camp. I said back then and I still believe it today, the 2A will never be abolished, at least not any time soon. Instead it will be regulated out of existence. First by accessories and looks. Stocks, grips, shrouds mags. Then by action type. Semi, lever, bolt... Everything is going to be "common sense". You don't need a semi auto. Then you don't need a lever action that hold 10 rounds. All the way to single shot.
And finally by bureaucracy through licensing, fees, storage, ....etc...I wouldn't doubt if there would be a psychiatrist appointment, a sheriff visit, ..etc... Of course everything will have a nice fee associated with it, there will be long waits for appointments. They're will be only half dozen psychiatrists in your area who are certified to do these types of "interviews" and they'll only be available 1 day a week between 2pm and 3pm on Wednesday! Just perfect timing! However the Dems will still be able to say they "respect" the constitution and the 2A and that anyone can still get a firearm.
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
ChattanoogaPhil
06-26-21, 07:54
When bump stocks came under fire and the pro rights community (including far too many here) just didn’t care because bump stocks are “fudd”, Many people including myself warned others that it was opening Pandora’s box to just up and make a piece of plastic illegal and it would have enduring consequences.
Well, they’re gonna go after everything at a granular level now, it’s exactly what we get for not fighting every battle, together and instead letting each other hang separately because “I don’t use those stupid things” Types of attitudes.
Pistol braces are just the next thing, “ghost guns” are too. They won’t ease up even a little bit until people unite en masse.
It’s the same thing with pistol braces right now, look at the comments in this site- people just don’t get it!
Indifferent gun owners, a duplicitous NRA and flip-flopping Washington politicians are disappointing.
Fortunately, we're making progress here in Tennessee. Governor Lee recently signed legislation making Tennessee a 2A sanctuary state. He also just signed into law permitless handgun carry aka 'constitutional carry'. As a bonus, teaching critical race theory is now banned from public schools. Our boys in Nashville have been busy.
Indifferent gun owners, a duplicitous NRA and flip-flopping Washington politicians are disappointing.
Fortunately, we're making progress here in Tennessee. Governor Lee recently signed legislation making Tennessee a 2A sanctuary state. He also just signed into law permitless handgun carry aka 'constitutional carry'. As a bonus, teaching critical race theory is now banned from public schools. Our boys in Nashville have been busy.
Go Tennessee! That all sounds wonderful.
I’ve always had my eye on TN for relocation when I can’t stand CO anymore.
Are you guys seeing much influx of Néw Yorkistannis, Commiefornians, etc?
Is the progressive blue plague making its way there, yet?
ChattanoogaPhil
06-26-21, 08:59
Go Tennessee! That all sounds wonderful.
I’ve always had my eye on TN for relocation when I can’t stand CO anymore.
Are you guys seeing much influx of Néw Yorkistannis, Commiefornians, etc?
Is the progressive blue plague making its way there, yet?
Unfortunately, yes. According to U-Haul, Tennessee was #1 during 2020, followed by Texas and Florida.
-----
More People Moved to Tennessee in 2020 Than Any Other State, According to a New Report
Texas and Florida came in second and third, respectively, on U-Haul's 2020 migration growth list.
"I'm seeing a lot of people from California move (to Tennessee) because they're attracted to our lifestyle," said Jeff Porter, U-Haul Company of Nashville president, in a press release. "Tennessee has no income tax and is very business-friendly. There are plenty of jobs. People and companies are taking note. Places like Nashville, Murfreesboro and Clarksville are attracting tons of new residents."
-----
Fortunately, we've been taking Ivermectin to keep the blue virus in check... haha. We overwhelming voted for Trump twice, flushed the traitor US Senator Corker, and continue to maintain strong republican majorities in the State House (73/26) and Senate (27/6).
When bump stocks came under fire and the pro rights community (including far too many here) just didn’t care because bump stocks are “fudd”, Many people including myself warned others that it was opening Pandora’s box to just up and make a piece of plastic illegal and it would have enduring consequences.
Well, they’re gonna go after everything at a granular level now, it’s exactly what we get for not fighting every battle, together and instead letting each other hang separately because “I don’t use those stupid things” Types of attitudes.
Pistol braces are just the next thing, “ghost guns” are too. They won’t ease up even a little bit until people unite en masse.
It’s the same thing with pistol braces right now, look at the comments in this site- people just don’t get it!
So I think pistol braces are stupid, but that doesn't mean I support ATF efforts to criminalize them. I do think people should have seen this coming and possibly set the stage, but that doesn't mean I support ATF efforts to criminalize them.
But more importantly, and what I've said all along, is that it's sad that people pay attention to this gomer shit when way more important issues have existed all along since 1968 and in a painful irony are the issues that allow ATF to make these "in the tail on the donkey" determinations in the first place.
People are bemoaning that only 100,000 gun owners posted their opposition to ATFs gun brace determination. If we could get 100,000 gun owners to understand what the "sporter clause" is and oppose that...we wouldn't be dealing with 90% of this crap.
Get rid of the sporter clause and:
Arms braces...it doesn't matter. There is no qualifier for acceptability of a firearm in any configuration.
80% receivers...it wouldn't matter. It's not even a part and ATF wouldn't have the ability to make blanket determinations.
Declaring uppers to be a firearm, binary triggers, etc. All that crap goes out the window. ATF has no magic wand to wave around and turn apples into oldsmobiles.
But probably fewer than 5% of all gun owners understand that the "sporter clause" is even there let alone how it works so we are left with "Hands off my arm brace handgun!!"
ChattanoogaPhil
06-27-21, 09:58
Federal regulations are made via rulemaking. Congress grants rulemaking authority to federal agencies, ATF being among them. You could strip out sporting purposes language from the GCA but it wouldn't have prevented the ATF from determining that a bump stock met machine gun definitions, then proceed with rulemaking process. Same with so-called pistol brace configurations. On the other hand, rulemaking attempt on M855 type ammo did rely on sporting purposes language.
Back in 2015, HR 2170 was introduced to address multiple issues concerning GCA sporting purposes language. It went nowhere.
The NRA advocated for rulemaking to regulate bump stocks in part because they feared a worse result if congress acted. At the time, Diane Feinstein was pounding the table that regulating bump stocks required congress to act.
It's nice to fantasize about coulda woulda shoulda gonna fights but ya still gotta fight the fight that's in front of ya, regardless if you think it's 'stupid'. Right now it's braces.
Federal regulations are made via rulemaking. Congress grants rulemaking authority to federal agencies, ATF being among them. You could strip out sporting purposes language from the GCA but it wouldn't have prevented the ATF from determining that a bump stock met machine gun definitions, then proceed with rulemaking process. Same with so-called pistol brace configurations. On the other hand, rulemaking attempt on M855 type ammo did rely on sporting purposes language.
Back in 2015, HR 2170 was introduced to address multiple issues concerning GCA sporting purposes language. It went nowhere.
The NRA advocated for rulemaking to regulate bump stocks in part because they feared a worse result if congress acted. At the time, Diane Feinstein was pounding the table that regulating bump stocks required congress to act.
It's nice to fantasize about coulda woulda shoulda gonna fights but ya still gotta fight the fight that's in front of ya, regardless if you think it's 'stupid'. Right now it's braces.
So the "sporter clause" might not have stopped ATF from changing definitions of machine guns, but it would have put an end to 95% of the "ATF has determined" nonsense.
That you even want to argue this point is astonishing. If there were no "sporter clause" we wouldn't be having the arm brace discussion at all and could be focused on more important things.
For every guy whose mantra is "the second amendment isn't about duck hunting", I simply want to ask, where do you think they got that idea? And the reason they keep us busy with arm braces and other absurd shit is so nobody goes "Hey what if we got rid of the idea that guns were only about target shooting or hunting?"
Diamondback
06-27-21, 19:59
So the "sporter clause" might not have stopped ATF from changing definitions of machine guns, but it would have put an end to 95% of the "ATF has determined" nonsense.
That you even want to argue this point is astonishing. If there were no "sporter clause" we wouldn't be having the arm brace discussion at all and could be focused on more important things.
For every guy whose mantra is "the second amendment isn't about duck hunting", I simply want to ask, where do you think they got that idea? And the reason they keep us busy with arm braces and other absurd shit is so nobody goes "Hey what if we got rid of the idea that guns were only about target shooting or hunting?"
This. Somebody needs to get a hold of Hinson in Iowa and tell her that her RIFLE Act is just feelgood until she strikes at Sporter Clause or NFA34.
https://bearingarms.com/john-petrolino/2021/06/26/rifle-act-aims-to-shoot-down-nfa-taxes-n46971
As a bonus, RIFLE doesn't do jack about the registration requirement, just wipes out the taxes which can ALWAYS be reinstated later.
This. Somebody needs to get a hold of Hinson in Iowa and tell her that her RIFLE Act is just feelgood until she strikes at Sporter Clause or NFA34.
https://bearingarms.com/john-petrolino/2021/06/26/rifle-act-aims-to-shoot-down-nfa-taxes-n46971
As a bonus, RIFLE doesn't do jack about the registration requirement, just wipes out the taxes which can ALWAYS be reinstated later.
We also want to make damn sure we are in a good position before we open up the NFA to any changes. It's not that I'm worried about the value of my NFA collection, but if that $200 tax were adjusted for inflation, then suppressors would become incredibly expensive...again.
We need to know what we are going after and we need to do it in the correct order. Aside from opening the registry to new machine guns both foreign and domestic we don't want to make any other real changes. That $200 mostly covered the background check, it doesn't even offset the cost of maintenance of records or a full staffed group of examiners.
P2Vaircrewman
06-28-21, 10:49
It ain't over until the fat lady sings.
https://www.captainsjournal.com/2021/06/27/sixth-circuit-bump-stock-ruling/
This. Somebody needs to get a hold of Hinson in Iowa and tell her that her RIFLE Act is just feelgood until she strikes at Sporter Clause or NFA34.
https://bearingarms.com/john-petrolino/2021/06/26/rifle-act-aims-to-shoot-down-nfa-taxes-n46971
As a bonus, RIFLE doesn't do jack about the registration requirement, just wipes out the taxes which can ALWAYS be reinstated later.
I agree.
She should label the tax as rascism, explaining that minorities cannot afford to pay it, and you’ll see how fast it disappears.
Let’s play the left game.
Diamondback
06-28-21, 16:49
I agree.
She should label the tax as rascism, explaining that minorities cannot afford to pay it, and you’ll see how fast it disappears.
Let’s play the left game.
Problem is, if we spike the tax then "mandatory registration is no big deal, not like it costs you anything..."
Problem is, if we spike the tax then "mandatory registration is no big deal, not like it costs you anything..."
Yeah. True.
Problem is, if we spike the tax then "mandatory registration is no big deal, not like it costs you anything..."
Properly ID mandatory registration as a civil rights violation. No game needed.
Any bans related to arms, ammo, mags, features etc. is unconstitutional. Including bumpstocks. The pistol brace nonsense has already been contested by conservative leadership and will undoubtedly be found a violation of Article VI. The collective intelligence has caught up with the hypocrisy, and its common knowledge that any government cannot seize property of lawful citizens, regulate arms, and ban arms related components, as it violates Western Law's fundamental frameworks. It also violates the Second Amendment which at all levels of government, they may not regulate any arms, and said arms are protected by Article VI. By violating Article VI (Supreme Law) government is in violation of the US Constitution itself. This writes "The People" a blank check to dismantle, defund, and discharge those behind these unlawful regulations. Including censure, and charging them with high crimes and disbarring those in the Judicial Branch.
So adding an lpvo essentially makes an sbr according to this points system… what a joke
So what’s the prize for getting the highest score?
10 years and or 10000.00 $ fine i assume
Anything new about this crap?
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/06/07/criteria-attached-stabilizing-braces/
Has anyone figured out the points system BS?
Anything new about this crap?
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/06/07/criteria-attached-stabilizing-braces/
Has anyone figured out the points system BS?
The point system is irrelevant since they added a clause that basically says "if we want to say it's an SBR, then it's an SBR. 10 years/$10,000 for you!" .
This is an unconstitutional trend with the ATF and their overlords. The new proposed firearms definition changes is more unconstitutional garbage that allows "the director" to define arms and components at will. This is the most blatant violation of Western Law and spits on Article VI and the Second Amendment. I cannot express how treasonous it is to allow anyone in the DOJ this kind of power. Every US citizen should be mad as hell that ANY leadership would allow this. The ATF has been the right hand for tyrants in our leadership for far too long. The DOJ by and large is facilitating these abuses of power.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-18-21, 15:23
Does anyone have a link to common examples? A 10.3/11.5 AR with a SB3. Some of the 9mm PPC set ups. HK MP5 pistols.
Seems like everyone is bitching about it, but I can’t find examples about what we are talking about.
Or the other way, what pistol braced guns are kosher?
Diamondback
07-18-21, 15:46
Or the other way, what pistol braced guns are kosher?
NONE. The whole point system is designed to make compliance impossible, and even if you somehow get the camel through the needle's eye "nope, it's an SBR because we SAY so."
OTOH, you have fearmongers on our side like the guys who insist "any AR pistol over 7" barrel goes above Length Limit"... BS, even with a LAW folder and an A5 tube my dev-mockup Mk18-ish comes in at 25.925 with SBM4 brace and FH removed. BARELY under the 26" limit to be Pistol (and thus CCW legal here) rather than Other Firearm, but... and this gives an illustration of how important tolerances are in parts, it squeaks in by just over 1/16".
So when does this go into effect?
So when does this go into effect?
Never. Article VI trumps it in spades. Anyone who carries out these orders is not in good standing with the US Constitution.
Never. Article VI trumps it in spades. Anyone who carries out these orders is not in good standing with the US Constitution.
When has that stopped them?
When has that stopped them?
Jumping through hoops and bending to these tyrants has not helped find common ground. Stop supporting coward leadership who plays cat and mouse with legislation. Call for a Convention of States and get to know the US Constitution and share your knowledge liberally. Citizens are gaining on the collective intelligence front, they are beginning to understand their rights. Spread the word, we are gaining. The NRA has allowed the establishment dictate gun legislation for decades, now we demand a better gun rights lobby and we demand our rights are adhered to, and now we need to demand a better leadership.
Never. Article VI trumps it in spades. Anyone who carries out these orders is not in good standing with the US Constitution.
Right. Since when has the Constitution stopped them before? So seriously, when is the 90 days up?
Right. Since when has the Constitution stopped them before? So seriously, when is the 90 days up?
At this point I believe there will be a lot of people who either just don't care anymore or will do like the liberals do and just ignore the laws they don't like.
At this point I believe there will be a lot of people who either just don't care anymore or will do like the liberals do and just ignore the laws they don't like.
I agree, and we all should. Plus, the vast majority of people who own braces don't even know about the rule change. Having said that it still doesn't answer my question lol
So when does this go into effect?
9/8/2021 is the end of the comment period. 9/9/21 is the beginning of the largest act of civil disobedience on record I would assume as i can't see many people bowing to this one...
And still the NRA hasn't updated their site recently with anything to suggest maybe, I don't know, that members comment and show the group to be something other than a paper tiger. Reverse the roles and Democrats and "moms demand action" or "everytown for gun safety" or any of these clueless groups would have 10 million people commenting while only having 5 million members...
9/8/2021 is the end of the comment period. 9/9/21 is the beginning of the largest act of civil disobedience on record I would assume as i can't see many people bowing to this one...
Wait did I miss something?
Just because the comment period ends September 8, does not mean on September 9th the sky falls. Or did I miss something?
Wait did I miss something?
Just because the comment period ends September 8, does not mean on September 9th the sky falls. Or did I miss something?That's what I was confused about but I think he means they're going to implement it regardless. The comment period is just a formality
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Sorry about that. I was speaking to no matter which way the comment process goes, people are not going to comply. Not sure of the date this proposal would actually take effect.
9/8/2021 is the end of the comment period. 9/9/21 is the beginning of the largest act of civil disobedience on record I would assume as i can't see many people bowing to this one...
Agreed. It's a giant poop-show and will result in FEMA internment camp levels of detainees and constitutional abuses at levels we have never seen. But we can see that Biden's tyranny holding 1/6 protestors in isolation without charges, that things have changed in this world of double standards. And sleepy Joe has slipped as he often does, about people needing F15 and nukes to take on the government: got news we are the government! What this means is Biden has plans: he is a typical sociopath that likes to brag about his power. It's our duty as a government of the people, not to merely exercise civil disobedience but also speak out loud and often, and take action against any abuses Biden and his followers impose on citizens. The media and big tech is working hard to censor ANYTHING they do not approve of, and we need to hold them accountable for it. We are wholly within our rights per Article VI (Supreme Law).
I see this as one of the all-time great rallying points that even non-shooters can comprehend.
A short time ago the government said these were legit. We spent X hundred million dollars buying them and 4-8X hundred million more for the shortie uppers to go with them. Now you say we must flush X billions total of our hard earned money down the toilet? Or else pay even more to register our right to keep and bear arms with the state? On the ruling of an unelected bureaucrat?
Even a lot of near-normal Dems would see this as onerous.
The entire thing is Unconstitutional.
Worse thing is that we don’t even see Republicans representatives and Senators fighting it.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-20-21, 17:27
Why is it so hard to show the most common pistol brace guns and show what how the points apply? I’ve asked like three times in this thread. I don’t know how you fight something like this when a gun forum can’t simply show what the impact is. Everyone likes to opine and bitch, but actual info seems pretty thin.
Why is it so hard to show the most common pistol brace guns and show what how the points apply? I’ve asked like three times in this thread. I don’t know how you fight something like this when a gun forum can’t simply show what the impact is. Everyone likes to opine and bitch, but actual info seems pretty thin.
Well, like I said in response to this question back in post #44, there are examples of the application of this points system to three different braced firearms in the text of the ruling itself. Go review that.
The link I posted in #44 doesn't work anymore. You'll have to get it from the Federal Register site now:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces
Diamondback
07-20-21, 17:59
Take the Springfield Saint Victor...
https://www.springfield-armory.com/saint-series/saint-victor-ar-15-pistols/saint-victor-556-ar-15-pistol
https://d7g7q7y3.stackpathcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/STV975556B-SBA3-1024x342.png
I. Prerequisites.
1. Must weigh more than 64oz. 88oz - Pass
2. Length Over 12 but under 26". 26.5 - FAIL
Must meet both to proceed.
Try again with a DD Mk18?
1. Must weigh more than 64oz. 93.6oz - Pass
2. Length Over 12 but under 26". 28.5 - FAIL
Must meet both to proceed.
I'm uncertain if these lengths are with FH, and if this BS is measuring with FH and brace installed or removed. This says BOTH these very popular pistols would become SBR's if I'm reading it right.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.