New BATF ruling on stabilizing braces today

[Cameramonkey]

I wouldn't want to have a booth anywhere near them - it will be a stink bomb magnet.

I'll save one* up and be sure and cropdust them if they show up at the NRAAM. maybe even make a few special trips if I can. Just gotta remember what I need to eat the night before. I'll ask the wife. She's the one that complains. LOL

Note the lack of purple.

*natural, internal, not one of the vials you can buy.

 

[Cameramonkey]

The other way I heard was if Fire/EMS are called to your house and they happen to see one out and go all Karen on you about it and call the po-po. I don't think that would happen around where I live, but in an urban area I could see it.

That happened to a former member here. He had the attitude "what the ATF doesnt know, wont hurt me." Then he got a visit from the police due to something he said to a home health care worker and whadda ya know... Red flagged. And when they went to collect the guns, they found more than they bargained for.

 

[Ark]

I never understood these presences either. Because everybody I've heard that interacted with them and asked questions, they either didnt know the answers or wouldnt give a specific answer because it was above their pay grade.

Talk about a waste of tax dollars. Pay thousands for a booth, and then thousands in payroll to have agents stand around being seen.

**** on a boar and all that...

I'm sure they'd say it's analogous to DNR having a booth at the big hunting and outdoor shows. "We're here to answer your questions".

In reality it's the same old government worker BS. Getting a day closer to retirement by sitting at a booth and playing on their phone.

 

[ArevaloSocom]

This rule does not affect “stabilizing braces” that are objectively designed and intended as a “stabilizing brace” for use by individuals with disabilities, and not for shouldering the weapon as a rifle. Such stabilizing braces are designed to conform to the arm and not as a buttstock

 

[DadSmith]

GOP lawmakers, NRA slam ATF rule to regulate pistol braces: 'Unconstitutional overreach'

Republican lawmakers and gun rights groups slammed the Biden administration after ATF finalized a new rule regulating pistols equipped with a stabilizing brace accessory as a short-barreled rifle.

www.foxnews.com

Tensions had been building for many years between residents of the 13 American colonies and the British authorities, particularly in Massachusetts. On the night of April 18, 1775, hundreds of British troops marched from Boston to nearby Concord in order to seize an arms cache. Paul Revere and other riders sounded the alarm, and colonial militiamen began mobilizing to intercept the Redcoat column. A confrontation on the Lexington town green started off the fighting, and soon the British were hastily retreating under intense fire. Many more battles followed, and in 1783 the colonists formally won their independence.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

This rule does not affect “stabilizing braces” that are objectively designed and intended as a “stabilizing brace” for use by individuals with disabilities, and not for shouldering the weapon as a rifle. Such stabilizing braces are designed to conform to the arm and not as a buttstock

But that's just the thing is that there's nothing "objective" about it. The ATF is saying that they get to just look at anything and decide on a whim whether or not it's designed for shoulder fire, and they come right out and say that this determination can change from one moment to the next, and be made not only based on the objective features of a particular product, but also on tangential factors like how the product is marketed.

They're essentially trying to say that what makes something a stock or not is not its objective physical features, like its dimensions and so forth, but rather the intention of the person making it. This makes everything completely subjective, and leaves the difference between a law-abiding citizen and a felon up to their whim and caprice.

 

[Mgderf]

I'll save one* up and be sure and cropdust them if they show up at the NRAAM. maybe even make a few special trips if I can. Just gotta remember what I need to eat the night before. I'll ask the wife. She's the one that complains. LOL

Note the lack of purple.

*natural, internal, not one of the vials you can buy.

If one person does it, that's a statement, but if you can get a hundred people a day to walk by and "leave a trail", well my friend, that could be considered a movement.
And that's what we need, an "I fart in your general direction" movement...
wait, on second thought, maybe "movement " isn't the best word after all...
Nevermind

 

[Cameramonkey]

If one person does it, that's a statement, but if you can get a hundred people a day to walk by and "leave a trail", well my friend, that could be considered a movement.
And that's what we need, an "I fart in your general direction" movement...
wait, on second thought, maybe "movement " isn't the best word after all...
Nevermind

So you are saying we should have a meet and eat Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights with things like Chili, ham and beans, etc?

 

[cbhausen]

So you are saying we should have a meet and eat Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights with things like Chili, ham and beans, etc?

This sounds fabulous!

 

[JAL]

Your AFT -- ever vigilant -- always watching -- everywhere -- including here.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Your AFT -- ever vigilant -- always watching -- everywhere -- including here.

View attachment 248818

If you want proof? Look carefully at the ATF booth at NRAAM. If you see gas masks stashed in the booth, they're watching.

 

[Expat]

Boo!

 

[grillak]

So you are saying we should have a meet and eat Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights with things like Chili, ham and beans, etc?

i'm more potent after scrambled eggs and pinto beans

 

[MCgrease08]

Just gotta remember what I need to eat the night before.

Sauerkraut and salmon seems like a pretty good starting point.

 

[tackdriver]

Maybe the DOT can lower speed limits on the interstate today and start writing speeding tickets to everybody that drove the speed limit on yesterdays interstate. I'm not even sure what the point of the rule is.... braces make guns extra deadly, ergo we must ban braces? We just want our dollars? We hate the American people and will attempt to manipulate and control them at all times? Pistol = ok. Pistol with a brace = pay the man or go to jail.

They don't even need to mess with the speed limits. That may involve the cost of new signs, or an incorrect sign may cause problems if the driver contests the ticket. They can simply stick with one of the easy ones like IC 9-21-8-52 Reckless driving. This already has the ambiguity baked in with language like "unreasonably high" and "unreasonably low" speed. Plus, you get a misdemeanor as a prize!

Bottom line - If they want to "get you", they'll find a way. If they don't want to, do whatever you want.

Shoplifting, public defecation, controlled substance abuse... don't even warrant a look. Cross the line in a law from the 1930's designed to curtail the Mobsters in Chicago and New York... You've got a real problem.

 

[88E30M50]

So, if this thing stands, would pistol braces become near worthless? If you register, you now have an SBR and could ditch the brace for a normal stock. If you don't register, you need to toss the brace in the trash. If you choose non-compliance, a brace buys you the same jail time as a stock, so there is no need to run the brace for those types as well.

What value would a brace have in that world?

Also, let's say that you abide by the law and trash your brace and even buy a 16" upper for your pistol. You now have a legal rifle config. Does owning the short barrel upper construe constructive intent? Could you take your long barreled pistol to the range and bring along your short upper, then after shooting the rifle config, remove the stock and swap uppers to run your pistol again?

 

[firecadet613]

 

[Cavman]

Feel bad especially for all those people working at place like SB tactical. If this bs crap from the clowns at atf stands they pretty much ruined companies

 

[Expat]

Feel bad especially for all those people working at place like SB tactical. If this bs crap from the clowns at atf stands they pretty much ruined companies

It probably isn't easy to sue the feds for damages, but most of the brace people initially had ATF position letters stating that their product was legal. I know I had a copy that came with my Sig Brace back years and years ago. I would think that would make a pretty good prima facie case.

 

[MikeDVB]

So I was doing some research on this whole situation trying to understand it. Researching the NFA and why an SBR needs a tax stamp and registered where as a pistol or rifle does not, etc.

So it seems, from my understanding, NFA was originally designed to make all gun ownership cost prohibitive. It was introduced back when you could get a firearm for ~$3 and the tax was $200. Granted $200 isn't much now as it hasn't been adjusted for inflation - but when NFA was proposed/introduced it essentially made guns cost prohibitive.

Originally the NFA was to cover hand guns as well - but it seems that the people were able to get that removed from the bill. My understanding is that the reason short barreled rifles and shotguns are NFA items is to avoid them basically being converted into something that could be easily concealed, like a handgun could be.

I.e. if the NFA essentially banned handguns by making them too expensive - people could then take their rifles and shotguns and cut them down to make them handgun-like in size and getting around the NFA.

The silly part, imho, is that since we were able to get handguns off the NFA back then - it doesn't make sense to control short barreled rifles and shotguns ... because if one wants an easily concealed gun they need not shorten a rifle or shotgun - handguns are readily available.

That said - I suspect it still exists due to a) forcing people to register and b) $$$ [tax stamps].

Basically the whole thing is a farse and should be repealed, imho - but I'm sure you probably knew that.

This whole stabilizing brace thing is a joke. First they said it was ok - and now they changed their mind... All because it makes the 'pistol' a 'short rifle' which is only prohibited because shortening it makes it "concealable" like a "pistol".......