Firearms Talk banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Article from TFB. New rules proposed and "worksheet" to determine if the setup meets requirements or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
Article from TFB. New rules proposed and "worksheet" to determine if the setup meets requirements or not.
Oh that will save a lot of lives in places like Chicago, NY, Seattle, and wherever criminals and felons have to register these things or do without them or whatever makes them less dangerous......when it freezes over. We have too many federal employees with not enough to do....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
827 Posts
We are I think watching the very possible destruction of this nation at the hands of socialists , communists, and idiots.
No nations government has ever stood secure in history. None. Most have died violently to be replaced by something worse .
Other than being a bloodier more violent downfall I can see no reason our nation will be any different .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,233 Posts
Article from TFB. New rules proposed and "worksheet" to determine if the setup meets requirements or not.
While I despise every attempt at infringement upon the RKBA, as in this case, I get the logic of such changing "guidance" and definitions.

The only thing that seems to distinguish a short-barreled rifle of rifle caliber and a short-barreled rifle-caliber "pistol" with a brace (of similar bbl length) is: nothing.

This sort of simplification and alteration of the definition is something I've thought would have occurred years ago. It's unsurprising it is happening now.

Under the ludicrous NFA "laws" covering short-bbl rifles, according to those definitions then the contemporary rifled "pistols" with shoulder bracing should be seen as no different. Even if they're standing on unconstitutionality to get it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
But what is telling is the absolutely asinine reasoning they are twisting and covorting to make them (most of them) illegal. I mean come on, did you read through the PDF? Here's an example, in one part they differentiate the "types" of braces, in particular the "cuff type" might "bruise your forearm", so they twist that to mean it is therefore really intended to be a shoulder stock and not really a brace. They're providing, albeit windy and vague, reasoins for second guessing "intent." The entire thing is so freakin subjective and ridiculous it's a joke.

This is no different than saying if a car has 300 or more HP and a 5-speed transmission, it's a race car and not street legal, but if it has a 4-speed transmission it's fine, unless the 5-speed transmission requires you to push the gear lever forward to put it into 5th gear, then it's OK. If you pull the gear lever backward for 5th gear, then it's a race car again. Makes absolutely no sense, totally asinine.

Instead of getting down in the weeds to fight this, we really need to be hammering our reps to just redefine the GCA and the NFA and get a lot of this crap removed, or the NFA totally done away with. They don't even use facts and statistics anymore to suipport this draconian sh1t. Thewy're so hellbent on AR-15's and braces or stocks when it's handguns that are used in over 60% of all firearms related homicides. Heck, even the 5.5" barreled Honey Badger is way bigger than any handgun for cryin out loud. Hey, is that a Honey Badger in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?

I was already considering doing a form 1 on my 300 BO pistol to make it an SBR (only because there are accessories and things I want to do with it that would require that), but it's all just so ridiculous.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,233 Posts
But what is telling is the absolutely asinine reasoning they are twisting and covorting to make them (most of them) illegal. I mean come on, did you read through the PDF? Here's an example, in one part they differentiate the "types" of braces, in particular the "cuff type" might "bruise your forearm", so they twist that to mean it is therefore really intended to be a shoulder stock and not really a brace. They're providing, albeit windy and vague, reasoins for second guessing "intent." The entire thing is so freakin subjective and ridiculous it's a joke.

This is no different than saying if a car has 300 or more HP and a 5-speed transmission, it's a race car and not street legal, but if it has a 4-speed transmission it's fine, unless the 5-speed transmission requires you to push the gear lever forward to put it into 5th gear, then it's OK. If you pull the gear lever backward for 5th gear, then it's a race car again. Makes absolutely no sense, totally asinine.

Instead of getting down in the weeds to fight this, we really need to be hammering our reps to just redefine the GCA and the NFA and get a lot of this crap removed, or the NFA totally done away with. They don't even use facts and statistics anymore to suipport this draconian sh1t. Thewy're so hellbent on AR-15's and braces or stocks when it's handguns that are used in over 60% of all firearms related homicides. Heck, even the 5.5" barreled Honey Badger is way bigger than any handgun for cryin out loud. Hey, is that a Honey Badger in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?

I was already considering doing a form 1 on my 300 BO pistol to make it an SBR (only because there are accessories and things I want to do with it that would require that), but it's all just so ridiculous.
Indeed, it's all pathetic and infuriating. It'd be almost pitiful, if it weren't for the fact that it's OUR RIGHTS being stolen from us, piecemeal by these venomous twits.

Regarding the entirety of the NFA, IMO, it's a scam. It's a couple fewer inches of steel on the barrel. It's a stabilizing accessory to aid accuracy. It's a sound device to keep one's hearing intact as one fires arms (along with those of the neighbors). None of which is indicative of criminality or intent, no more than ~300HP+ in a motor vehicle is indicative of being a race car or getaway car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
I would really like to just simply see the 2A abidded by and law enforcement go after criminals and murderers everywhere then have to answer to an honest judicial and penal system. I really don't see how a "pistol brace" or a "pistol grip" or a "suppressor" ban is ever going to keep one person from getting shot. It's stupidity in it's purest form. Where do these people come from?

Does anyone really believe Chicago, D.C., or gangs anywhere care about this? Does anyone here want to be "dropped" into South Chicago or downtown NYC with no way out other than by foot? Think you would make it out alive? Think any gang member or law breaker would run and get their "pistol brace" or "assault weapon" permitted because of some anti-2A law? I thought this is what laws and law enforcement is partially about. Same as legislation. I don't like legislators and their sub-groups because they ......guess what....pass new laws all the time that are not needed and they seek re-election to keep passing laws without taking obsolete ones off the books . Why aren't existing laws just enforced and unconstitutional laws done away with? Answer: It would take too many lifetimes to pull it off. Over and out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,233 Posts
I would really like to just simply see the 2A abidded by and law enforcement go after criminals and murderers everywhere then have to answer to an honest judicial and penal system. I really don't see how a "pistol brace" or a "pistol grip" or a "suppressor" ban is ever going to keep one person from getting shot. It's stupidity in it's purest form. Where do these people come from?

Does anyone really believe Chicago, D.C., or gangs anywhere care about this? Does anyone here want to be "dropped" into South Chicago or downtown NYC with no way out other than by foot? Think you would make it out alive? Think any gang member or law breaker would run and get their "pistol brace" or "assault weapon" permitted because of some anti-2A law? I thought this is what laws and law enforcement is partially about. Same as legislation. I don't like legislators and their sub-groups because they ......guess what....pass new laws all the time that are not needed and they seek re-election to keep passing laws without taking obsolete ones off the books . Why aren't existing laws just enforced and unconstitutional laws done away with? Answer: It would take too many lifetimes to pull it off. Over and out.
Yup.

BIG difference between merely crafting law and ... well, governing.

Imagine that. Actually governing to correct situations and stupidities, to actually craft only law that can, in everybody's mind, pass the constitutional "sniff" test both on the face of it and at the deeper level. Wouldn't that be refreshing. NO infringements, yet holding miscreants utterly accountable for actions that actually create harms to others or manifestly imminently threaten others. But the proverbial "they" won't tolerate being so lawful and just. Isn't in their nature, being big, legal-weenie "legislators" and all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
There is so much about this that is infuriating, but they are effectively turning millions of law abiding citizens into felons with the stroke of a pen. The whole brace thing has been controversial, but primarily around shouldering them, and the ATF has gone back and forth on that several times. Since at least 2017 they have been OK with doing that and not a lot of hoopla around the designs of various types over the years. I dare say they have, through their own waffling about, created a bit of precedent in the fact that braces, at least those that have been and currently still are, on the market. Millions have been sold and some businesses have prospered because the AR platform is so customizable (they don't call it the lego rifle for nothing). Now, by simply altering their definitions and applying some ridiculous and subjective number grading scheme are rendering millions of pistols as illegal. This is going to have some economic kickback as well as causing people to lose their investment in their firearm, or a barrage of form 1's as some will seek to pay their tax stamp and convert them to SBR's. That alone is BS, pay the almighty government so they will "allow" you to keep your firearm the way it is when it's been perfectly legal for years. I seriously hope this meets severe backlash, if not an outright plea to the Supreme Court. It effectively rewrites law, which I thought only Congress can do. I did not elect the head of the ATF or any of the cronies sitting around masterminding this tripe.

It's clear our government is not seeking remedies for gun related crime since rifles of all types, much less an AR type rifle, are used far, far less in crime than handguns. This is absolutely agenda driven to impugn the ownership or possession of an AR, or an AR pistol, but I believe this is just a start on their part. They will not be satisfied with this latest round and will continue to make owning or purchasing an AR, or AR accessories, more and more difficult, if they don't just outright ban them...again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
If you guys haven't done so, I urge you to go to the following link and submit your comments as the proposed changes are currently open for such:


I submitted mine and just received an email that it has been accepted. Here is what I wrote:

"As a law abiding career veteran of the United States Armed Forces,I am wholly dismayed at this, yet again, subjective attempt to turn law abiding citizens into felons at the stroke of a pen. The BATF has ambiguously and onerously brought forth on, multiple occasions, wording and definitions that have swayed the legal line throughout the years. This latest round of clear agenda driven word salad does not serve to impact criminal activity in any meaningful or measurable way. It is clear to any firearms enthusiast the federal government is not interested in actual safety or saving lives, but rather a focused attempt to demonize and impugn those who choose to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights and in particular, those who choose to own a very specific type of firearm.

The government's own statistics (FBI Uniform Crime Reports) inexorably demonstrate the dichotomy of actual, factual, and documented crime rates by specific firearm types. From the statistics, rifles of all types are used in less than 5% of all gun related homicides. The AR-15 is a small subset of that total. If the government were truly interested in gun legislation for the "safety of all" (their own proclamation) then certainly their focus would be on the weapon types used in the overwhelming majority of crimes...that, of course, being handguns.

In addition, the BATF has held, since at least 2017, that the pistol stabilizing braces on the market (then and now) are acceptable and to that extent have spent their hard earned money on those items with the belief they were complying with the law. The proposed wording and definition changes, while doing little to nothing in terms of crime prevention, will unquestionably have economic impact on many small businesses around the country.

The overwhelming majority of firearms enthusiasts have endured and continue to pay the fees and work to ensure they are compliant with the law. These new definitions will simply force many to lose investments in the, at the time, legal items, or to pay yet more taxes to the almighty government in order to meet legalities that are, and have been, unconstitutional, onerous, ambiguous, and subjective."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
Yup.

BIG difference between merely crafting law and ... well, governing.

Imagine that. Actually governing to correct situations and stupidities, to actually craft only law that can, in everybody's mind, pass the constitutional "sniff" test both on the face of it and at the deeper level. Wouldn't that be refreshing. NO infringements, yet holding miscreants utterly accountable for actions that actually create harms to others or manifestly imminently threaten others. But the proverbial "they" won't tolerate being so lawful and just. Isn't in their nature, being big, legal-weenie "legislators" and all.
I couldn't say it better. IF they would just do their jobs with honesty and integrity! Can we imagine how much better this country would be? Like I say, POWER CORRUPTS. It's all about power, money, self-delusion, and ego. These people never physically get out into real society. They surround themselves with each other, paid for security, and are in their own self-created bubble. We aren't good enough for them to associate with. They are good enough for me to associate with them. That's just how I think part of it really is.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,434 Posts
They left themselves an ambiguous out. Simply put nothing is legal no matter what the points if they feel it is an SBR by intent. A braced pistol or an SBR is the only center fire my wife can handle because of her health. The ATF intends to fine her $200 because she is disabled. This extends to a lot of people in the same situation. Her braced pistol is for sale at a class 3 FFL. It will probably be there a long time. I would have to pay the $200 and sit out the wait to get it back.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,233 Posts
I couldn't say it better. IF they would just do their jobs with honesty and integrity! Can we imagine how much better this country would be? Like I say, POWER CORRUPTS. It's all about power, money, self-delusion, and ego. These people never physically get out into real society. They surround themselves with each other, paid for security, and are in their own self-created bubble. We aren't good enough for them to associate with. They are good enough for me to associate with them. That's just how I think part of it really is.
They don't work for us, remember. Biden's pet phrase, this past year.

I suspect that's the commonplace attitude amongst them, out there. That we're to be ruled and managed, not treated as the people who've hired these "temps" into these roles. For the most part, far too many of them act like they don't report to us, let alone answer to us. Their sworn oaths, with far too many of them, are so meaningless as to escape their notice.

Accuracy braces. I wonder if any of them truly care about this current assault.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,434 Posts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
The more I look at this and the more I think about it, I'm leaning closer and closer to just pay the damn $200 and form 1 my pistol as an SBR and forget all this chicanery. No more worrying about if my brace is legal or not, if I am over or under a certain weight, is it too long or too short, is my front grip too vertical, no more jumping through subjective hoops to wonder if my firearm is legal, etc. SBR it and I can put whatever the hell I want on it when I want, including different uppers in different calibers since there is no requirement to amend the form if you do (although they ask that you let them know by sending in a letter). My suppressor form 3 was approved and it is on its way from the retailer I ordered it from to my FFL/SOT here in my state. It should be here any day so I can go over and do the form 4/prints, etc. I might just go ahead and do the form 1 at that time too. Just get it all done in one go.

I had someone basically excoriate me for saying that, they said I was wimping out and "cowtowing to the man", letting the government infringe on our rights, giving them what they want, a registered firearm they can come and confiscate when they are banned and paying them money for my "right." The thing is, whether I do or not, keeping an illegal pistol and thumbing my nose at them isn't going to change a thing, other than make me a felon and I'm not willing to go to jail up to 10 years and acrue tens of thousands in fines, lose my right to ever own a firearm again, or to vote over a $50 piece of plastic. Besides, you're naive if you don't think they already know (or could quickly and easily find out) that I own X number of AR platform firearms (or at the very least the number of lowers I've purchased). The 4473 is in a database, but oh, "it's not really a list of who owns what, it's just for background check purposes"..uh huh, you keep believing that. Information is gold, and although modern computers and the internet make things more convenient for us, it also makes it easy and convenient for them to store, retrieve, and search through that data as well (I've been an IT professional for over 25 years (some of it during my Air Force career), I know inside and out what the government and corporations do with any information they get. IF things ever get to the point that federal jackboots demand you hand over certain firearms, or they're literally going through the streets confiscating weapons, you can be sure they'll have a list in hand of who has what, and probably an arm load of court orders to go with it.

The only way the 2A is ever going to be the right it was intended to be is if the federal government has some massive change of heart (yeah, fat chance on that), or we end up in another Boston Tea Party/SHTF scenario, and in that case, I don't think anyone is going to be too concerned with what or how the ATF is defining things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
I guess I am old school, but if you permanently attach a devise to the end of a pistol, that you can use as a brace, against the shoulder, the pistol is no longer a pistol. Pistols are pistols and rifles are rifles. The ATF should have made things clear at the beginning, but they let those Velcro straps, that they used to have, persuade them that people were really strapping the "arm brace" to their arm, and not shouldering them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
That's just it, your opinion is not the law (and I don't mean that in a condescending or rude way). The government makes the law and the ATF writes documents on how they interpret the law and how it applies to what. The issue for me is not this or that is legal or illegal, it's the constant waffling around. One day parts X, Y, Z are legal, then they're not, then they are. As for using the brace against the shoulder, they've waffled on that at least three times with the latest, as of 2017, being that it is not illegal to shoulder a brace, although it is only supposed to be "incidental, sporadic, or situational use." They clarify that by saying in reference to the 2015 ruling, "use of an arm brace (in its original approved configuration) from a firing position at or near the shoulder was sufficient to constitute 'redesign', such interpretations are incorrect and not consistent with ATF's interpretation of the statute or the manner in which it has historically been enforced."

Ok, fine, so braces are legal, and firing said pistol from or near the shoulder is also legal. It should just stay at that. Although ATF doesn't write law and they are only interpreting and defining, there is precedent in these matters. You can't tell everyone that something is good to go one day, then come along and change it again (often using some seriously ridiculous "validation"), set the parameters and then leave it alone. They even did away with classifying accessories as they previously did, now a manufacturer has to submit a product attached to a firearm for them to even look at it.

What makes it yet more ridiculous is that a form 1 is easy to apply for and easy to get approved (as long as you don't have a criminal history). As long as you comply with the relatively simply rules there, the ATF isn't going to bat an eye at you. But, of course, you paid your tax...which is frankly, unconstitutional, but they got your money.

There really is no rhym or reason to the crap they do, it has absolutely zero to do with "public safety" and everything to do with a political agenda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts
The heck of it all is that NONE of anything involving a "pistol brace" is going to save ANY lives. It's just more govt. gymnastics by bureaucrats that aren't needed that we have to pay for, that don't have productive "jobs", that aren't qualified to do anything but draw a paycheck, that don't respect the constitution, that are uneducated, and we pay a retirement and benefits to when they "retire" from a "job" that none of us understand, approve of, and respect. People that taxpayers pay have more productive things to be working on, like how to reduce government payroll costs.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top