Atf to have rules on pistol braces aug ‘22

[cosmo223]

Don't think ATF is ever going to be going door to door to seize all pistols that have braces on them and then analyze them against some asinine points system. Rather, as others have said, it's going to be an additional charge they bring against you if you're arrested for some other firearms violation. I seem to recall seeing a chart of the number of people charged with having an illegal SBR (i.e. short barreled upper on a lower with a stock that was unregistered). My memory is that there were only a handful of cases a year.

But this is all tremendously frustrating. Those of us who own guns legally are by definition law abiding citizens, since felons are prohibited from owning guns. Tens of thousands of us have purchased pistol braces, put them on lowers, and then attached those lowers to uppers with barrels under 16" because the ATF specifically told us that these would be considered legal pistols. Various companies made hundreds of thousand of dollars selling us these braces, sometimes including copies of ATF letters stating that these braces could legally be attached to lowers to create pistols. Will we now be penalized for relying on the ATF and be faced with choosing between filling out an onerous form that requires multiple copies, passport photos, fingerprints, the payment of a $200 tax and a wait of 4-6 months or risking suddenly becoming a felon? If the federal government really wants to go down this road, they better allocate a couple of billion dollars to build more prisons and budget a couple of hundred million a year to operate and staff those prisons.

[just a scout]

They got Drew Peterson for having an unpinned 14.5” barrel when they couldn’t get him for murder or conspiracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[joedirt199]

Without the murder or conspiracy allegations he would have never been on the radar.

And he did get convicted of murder in 2012.

[GHMann]

Do we know if they are actually going to deem them as NFA items, or are they just going to make the decision in August. I thought there were enough comments against it to give them second thoughts. And it won't stand up constitutionally. Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes actions retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed. Two clauses in the United States Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, clause 3. The other applies to states in Article 1, section 10.

[Cane55]

Do we know if they are actually going to deem them as NFA items, or are they just going to make the decision in August. I thought there were enough comments against it to give them second thoughts. And it won't stand up constitutionally. Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes actions retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed. Two clauses in the United States Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, clause 3. The other applies to states in Article 1, section 10.

I spoke to John Crump and he told me it’s not written in stone and hasn’t been finalized yet, but it’s not looking good. Tens of millions of these braces have already been sold. It’s weird that they make “final decisions” on things like this, and then just a few years later, with a different administration, suddenly can reverse it. And it doesn’t have to go through Congress either, it’s like a loophole the anti A2 community have figured out and are now exploiting.

[ubet]

I spoke to John Crump and he told me it’s not written in stone and hasn’t been finalized yet, but it’s not looking good. Tens of millions of these braces have already been sold. It’s weird that they make “final decisions” on things like this, and then just a few years later, with a different administration, suddenly can reverse it. And it doesn’t have to go through Congress either, it’s like a loophole the anti A2 community have figured out and are now exploiting.

We can thank Congress for giving up laws making powers to unelected officials in these different regulatory agencies to make laws as they see fit. That’s where the real problem lies


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Core781]

More justification to get rid of the ATF once and for all.

[GHMann]

I believe the GOA is in the process of getting a bill sponsored in Congress that would in effect, repeal the part of the NFA concerning SBRs and SBSs. That is probably a long shot and a long way off, but it is a glimmer of hope. No doubt they will also fight the brace ban if or when that happens.

[flenna]

Do we know if they are actually going to deem them as NFA items, or are they just going to make the decision in August. I thought there were enough comments against it to give them second thoughts. And it won't stand up constitutionally. Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes actions retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed. Two clauses in the United States Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, clause 3. The other applies to states in Article 1, section 10.

Gun laws in and of themselves are unconstitutional as are a good majority of federal laws. I don’t think ex post facto will stop the feds from doing what they want.

[jethroUSMC]

Or Leftists/Progressives/Democrats


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Bolshevik is the term you're both looking for. That is the ideology of the people pushing this garbage.