AFT pistol stabilizing brace rule just came down.

[Racer X]

I read after the House passed the legislation to kill the ATF determination on this that Pres Biden said if it ever passed the Senate, and came to his desk, he would veto it. Seems to me that if the people want it, why would a president interfere, unless there was a specific agenda?

[Sistema1927]

Specific agenda?

I regret to inform you that Joe Biden is trying to talk about AR-15s again. His level of ignorance is astounding. | Not the Bee

[Racer X]

Originally Posted by Sistema1927

Specific agenda?

I regret to inform you that Joe Biden is trying to talk about AR-15s again. His level of ignorance is astounding. | Not the Bee

that is embarassing for us as a nation. I'd say that about any president as ignorant and unable to speak clearly as him.

[stansdds]

Originally Posted by Racer X

that is embarassing for us as a nation. I'd say that about any president as ignorant and unable to speak clearly as him.

Yeah, well, ummmm, he ended his ignorant and misguided speech with:


"I will stand in front of each section — no, I really mean it — and if you can see the camera they can see you. It is the least consequential part of this whole meeting for you, I promise.

God save the queen, man."

[BC38]

Originally Posted by stansdds

Yeah, well, ummmm, he ended his ignorant and misguided speech with:


"I will stand in front of each section — no, I really mean it — and if you can see the camera they can see you. It is the least consequential part of this whole meeting for you, I promise.

God save the queen, man."

More like God save US (both the United States and us as citizens).

[s&wchad]

Another court case to watch...

Gun advocates challenge Biden administration rules on handgun braces at appeals court - ABC News

[Sistema1927]

Originally Posted by s&wchad

Another court case to watch...

Gun advocates challenge Biden administration rules on handgun braces at appeals court - ABC News

That article begins with "Appellate court judges in New Orleans closely questioned a government attorney on Thursday over a Biden administration rule aimed at curbing the use of stabilizing braces, which are handgun attachments that have been used in multiple mass shootings in recent years."

It then goes downhill from there. Objective journalism is dead.

[BC38]

Originally Posted by Sistema1927

"stabilizing braces, which are handgun attachments that have been used in multiple mass shootings in recent years."

First time I've ever heard that claim. I know they were used in a couple of shootings, and I've heard the 2A opponents say that they COULD be used for mass shootings, but I've never heard them say that they have been used in MULTIPLE shootings. They must be referring to movies & TV...

[Benton Quest]

The stabilizing brace allows you to shoot bigger bullets for more death power. Fact.

Or not.

Doesn't matter.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

[Racer X]

someone here tied to law enforcement looked up and found 2 crimes tied to the use of a braced pistol, with a 3rd as undetermined I believe. 2

[BC38]

Originally Posted by Benton Quest

The stabilizing brace allows you to shoot bigger bullets for more death power. Fact.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

I think the quote you're looking for went like this...

"Put a pistol on a brace, it turns into a gun... makes it more... you can have a higher-caliber weapon, higher-caliber bullet coming out of that gun!"

So a brace makes a .223 into a .308? COOL! Now I really want one!

[Muss Muggins]

Two shootings, and 100 requests for traces. Nationwide. Ever. I stand by that statement as fact . . .

Originally Posted by Racer X

someone here tied to law enforcement looked up and found 2 crimes tied to the use of a braced pistol, with a 3rd as undetermined I believe. 2

[Racer X]

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

Two shootings, and 100 requests for traces. Nationwide. Ever. I stand by that statement as fact . . .

Love you man. I was 99% sure it was you.

[ladder13]

Another slap, for now.


US pistol brace rule likely illegal, federal appeals court rules | Reuters


The court did not immediately block enforcement of the rule, instead sending the case back to U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas. O'Connor will have to decide whether to issue an order blocking enforcement while the case goes forward, and if so, whether that order will apply nationwide or only to the plaintiffs in the case.

[smoothshooter]

Originally Posted by AlwaysArmed

This may be a blessing in disguise. Millions of AR pistols are out there. It can't be legal (or tolerated) to make millions of Americans felons overnight.
As far as the 5th Circuits ruling, that only applies within the boundaries of the 5th Circuit.
Hopefully we will see an end to the NFA and GCA within our lifetime. Better hurry up. I'm 65 and retiring next week.
Support GOA, FPC and others that support us. If we all gave just $5, it would go a long way toward getting our 2A back.
AA

NFA and GCA ‘68 are here to stay.
And will be expanded.
Socialist governments don’t tolerate widespread private ownership of large amounts of firearms very long.

[smoothshooter]

I only wish the court was debating law on restoring gun rights concerning something more consequential than pistol braces.

[Racer X]

Originally Posted by ladder13

Another slap, for now.


US pistol brace rule likely illegal, federal appeals court rules | Reuters


The court did not immediately block enforcement of the rule, instead sending the case back to U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas. O'Connor will have to decide whether to issue an order blocking enforcement while the case goes forward, and if so, whether that order will apply nationwide or only to the plaintiffs in the case.

This to me is very important "Circuit Judge Don Willett said in a concurring opinion that the rule likely violated not only the Administrative Procedure Act, but also the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the Constitution, an issue that the majority did not address" Since the lawsuit didn't allege 2A violations, they can't rule on it, is my understanding. Now, if it gets to SCOTUS, I believe they can toss it out on nunerous reasons, especially if the suit alleges both APA violations AND a 2A challenge. His concurrence is here "Don R. Willett, Circuit Judge, concurring: I join the majority’s careful opinion in full measure. I write separately because I suspect that the Final Rule would likely fail constitutional muster even if it were a logical outgrowth of the worksheet idea that preceded it"


What has come out of all this scrutiny, which I had no idea about, is that the BATFE has never been given authority to regulate handguns, unless they are fully automatic. The NFA specifically left out handguns. That is why the BATFE is so frantically trying to define these as short barreled rifles. THOSE they can regulate. But Congress never authorized the BATFE to regulate pistols ( unless they are fully automatic) Shotguns, rifles, hand grenades and chemical gas. No pistols in the NFA.

I read the decision last night and it was very well drafted. https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1690919131 "Instead, the final text of the NFA specifically exempts “a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore” from its coverage. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(e). And when Congress enacted the GCA 30 years later to expand federal firearms regulation, the statute defined handguns but did not include any additional restrictions on them"

[ladder13]

I’m getting to really like the FPC.

[CZU]

YouTube

[Racer X]

Originally Posted by CZU

HUGE NEWS!! Judge Destroys ATF In PISTOL BRACE Case! - YouTube

https://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/w...ow_temp-15.pdf

and if you pay attention, he also lays out that it is a 2A violation as these arms are protected, thus parts of the NFA may be invalid, if lawsuits pursue that line of thought. And the act of adding a pistol brace falls under "gunsmithing" and that is protected as well. He even quoted this Law Review article, which I already knew about after I researched the frames/receivers rule lawsuit. https://commons.stmarytx.edu/cgi/vie...aryslawjournal

The ATF really screwed up when they had people register their braced pistols, because we now have incontravertible proof there are at least half a million lawfully owned braced firearms in ther database, which defeats the "dangerous AND unusual" requirement to enable a ban or restrictions. Caetano (2016) established 200K+ is the threshold for "common" If its common, it isn't "unusual" Thus they can't be restricted/banned.

[ISCS Yoda]

I like being incidental to this ruling!!!

In affording complete relief to Plaintiffs, the injunction’s
benefits to non-parties to the suit are “merely incidental.” Id.

[03hemi]

Supreme Court 6-3 Decision Ends ATF Pistol Brace ruling.
Edit: This was some info told to me from a friend that's a Federal agent last night at cigar night and I'm trying to confirm it, but I'm thinking he had his facts wrong now? I can't find anything.

[BC38]

Originally Posted by 03hemi

Supreme Court 6-3 Decision Ends ATF Pistol Brace ruling.

YESSSS!
It is a great day for the 2nd Amendment!
We are so fortunate to FINALLY have a SCOTUS majority that is actually interpreting the Constitution in the context of the framer's original intent - rather than trying to legislate from the bench.

EDIT: AWWWWWW MAN! I too was so thrilled I jumped right on the bandwagon! Hopefully just a premature celebration.

[Well Armed]

Originally Posted by 03hemi

Supreme Court 6-3 Decision Ends ATF Pistol Brace ruling.

What are you talking about? They haven't had a pistol brace case argued before them yet. The brace lawsuits are still working their way up the judicial ladder.

[s&wchad]

Originally Posted by 03hemi

Supreme Court 6-3 Decision Ends ATF Pistol Brace ruling.

I've seen nothing about this...
Got a link?

[03hemi]

Originally Posted by Well Armed

What are you talking about? They haven't had a pistol brace case argued before them yet. The brace lawsuits are still working their way up the judicial ladder.

I edited my statement. You are correct, bad info from a federal agent.
I was so ecstatic when he told me this and I didn't know if it had come up to them yet, but naturally I took his word because he's a federal agent with his own AR pistols.
I so wanted this nightmare to be over too, sorry guys.

[03hemi]

Originally Posted by s&wchad

I've seen nothing about this...
Got a link?

See my edited post, bad info from a federal agent friend at cigar night. He had his facts wrong.

[wood714]

I've wondered what's going on with the pistol brace thing.

PSA is selling lowers with a pistol brace. I called them yesterday, and they said there's no law preventing them from selling them. The girl did say some FFL's won't accept them. Obviously PSA can't ship a Class 3 NFA weapon to a regular FFL.

Mine does, and I have a 7.5" 5.56 upper that needs a pistol lower. Still have everything else too. I did the stupid free tax stamp on the lower in the pic. I have 13" upper on it now.

It was the perfect truck gun for multi state road trips. No laws in FL. GA, Tenn, KY, or OH about having a pistol in your truck that I know of. My carry permit is good in all them too.

[GaryS]

This just in.

Federal Judge Vacates ATF Rule on Pistol Braces – Bearing Arms

We're still waiting to see what the Supreme Court does in Rahimi and Cargill, but gun owners did get some very good news from the federal courts on Thursday. A U.S. District Judge in Texas has vacated the ATF's rule treating pistols equipped with stabilizing braces as short-barreled rifles; granting relief not only for the named plaintiffs involved in the litigation, but for every gun owner across the country who owns a brace.

In his decision, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor ruled that the ATF's rule treating most pistol braces as accessories that turn pistols into SBRs violated the Administrative Procedures Act in a number of ways.

Still a long way to go, but this is a very good decision. As noted in the article, depending on what SCOTUS decides in Cargill this might hold up.

[CH4]

Originally Posted by sigp220.45

Its not.

Stocks on handguns have been illegal (without government approval) since before I was born. And I’m old.

Pistol braces are stocks. The work-around worked for a while. It doesn’t anymore.

If you want pistol stocks to be legal, work on that.

I will now launch myself onto many ignore lists: I don’t care about the ATF deciding pistol stocks are masquerading as arm braces.

I hear what you’re saying and totally agree, but ATF created this mess and there’s no way to put the genie back in the bottle. For years the ATF said they were legal, issuing approval letters to manufacturers. Relying on ATF’s green light, millions of braces were made and millions were purchased. Can’t change boats mid-stream, especially now that they’re in common use and then go after law abiding citizens for an arbitrary and capricious regulation.

The equally vague, capricious and arbitrary gun show loophole fiasco is also on the same track to a similar and certain death.

[ladder13]

No one is above the law.

[CH4]

Originally Posted by ladder13

No one is above the law.

Yep, including ATF et al.

[GaryS]

In light of the Cargill decision, I expect that this ruling will be upheld.

[walnutred]

Originally Posted by CH4

I hear what you’re saying and totally agree, but ATF created this mess and there’s no way to put the genie back in the bottle. For years the ATF said they were legal, issuing approval letters to manufacturers. Relying on ATF’s green light, millions of braces were made and millions were purchased. Can’t change boats mid-stream, especially now that they’re in common use and then go after law abiding citizens for an arbitrary and capricious regulation.

The equally vague, capricious and arbitrary gun show loophole fiasco is also on the same track to a similar and certain death.

IIRC The ATF took this issue up at Trumps request.

[03hemi]

Originally Posted by Sistema1927

Specific agenda?

I regret to inform you that Joe Biden is trying to talk about AR-15s again. His level of ignorance is astounding. | Not the Bee

listening to Biden talk about firearms is akin to my wife explaining how to do a break job?

[CH4]

Although not a 2A specific case, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo will have a huge impact on how ATF, EPA, etc., create enforce their often unconstitutional regulations via the Chevron Deference. Good chance this case will be the final nail for the Chevron Deference.


Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo - Wikipedia

[Well Armed]

It's funny how all the FUDDs across firearm forums and social media who were co-signing with the ATF's unconditional and illegal actions have suddenly gone quite. They were gloating with "I told you so" post even the braces were banned because they asserted that braces were stocks and thus they should be illegal. They stated that pistol braces and AR pistol were asinine while making discouraging remarked about the type of millions of gun owners who own them. They also claimed it was perfectly legal for the ATF to create law by citing Chevron. Now, they all are hiding like roaches in the light.

Originally Posted by sigp220.45

Its not.
Stocks on handguns have been illegal (without government approval) since before I was born. And I’m old.

Pistol braces are stocks. The work-around worked for a while. It doesn’t anymore.

If you want pistol stocks to be legal, work on that.

I will now launch myself onto many ignore lists: I don’t care about the ATF deciding pistol stocks are masquerading as arm braces.

Originally Posted by sigp220.45

They didn’t. The law making pistol stocks illegal was passed and signed into law decades ago.

They’ve ruled arm braces fall under that law.

I agree. I’ve never seen anyone use one on these things as an arm brace. I have seen plenty of people use them as a shoulder stock.

It was a good try while it lasted.

How does it feel to be so loud and assertive about something while being completely wrong at the same time? All your ridiculous comments have not aged well at all. Now there's egg all over your face. What say you about all the federal rulings coming down that proved you to be wrong? How do you feel now braces now that SCOTUS killed the bumpstock rule that was enacted in the same manner as the pistol brace rule. How do you feel now that the brace rule has been thrown out as well?

Originally Posted by waffles

I also think that in a world where the NFA is still law, whether I like it or not, the pistol braces went far over the "I'm not touching you!" line. The original sig brace was definitely easily used as a stock, but the shape and the straps made sense as an accessibility device (indeed, I'd actually seen it used once by a person who was born with an unusable arm).

The braces have NOT gone "too far." To far would be an actual stock designed to be a stock and, most importantly, meeting the legal definition of a stock! A brace designed to be a brace is a brace and NOT a stock regardless of how it's used. You too have been proven to be wrong.

[Well Armed]

Originally Posted by CH4

I hear what you’re saying and totally agree, but ATF created this mess and there’s no way to put the genie back in the bottle. For years the ATF said they were legal, issuing approval letters to manufacturers. Relying on ATF’s green light, millions of braces were made and millions were purchased. Can’t change boats mid-stream, especially now that they’re in common use and then go after law abiding citizens for an arbitrary and capricious regulation.

The equally vague, capricious and arbitrary gun show loophole fiasco is also on the same track to a similar and certain death.

What the ATF originally ruled has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Even if they ruled a brace was a stock from the onset, they would have been overstepping their authority. They ruled the way they initially ruled because they initially were ruling based on the text of the law. The same text of the law that is killing the brace rule is the same text of the law the ATF adhered to before Trump told them otherwise, and it's the same text that would slapped the ATF down had they initially claimed pistol braces were stocks.