AFT pistol stabilizing brace rule just came down.

BC38 said:
For now, removing the brace and putting a foam pad on the buffer tube seems like the most prudent thing to do.
Click to expand...

According to the AFT, that will do nothing to make the firearm legal. Buried in their ridiculous publication, removing the pistol brace and leaving the barrel shorter than 16 inches makes the weapon an SBR.
It is only when you remove the short barrel that you make the firearm legal. You can remove the short barrel and leave the pistol brace on. Or, replace the short barrel with a 16 inch barrel and leave the pistol brace on.
It's ridiculous and makes no sense.
Removing your complete pistol upper from the lower and waiting for this "rule" to be struck down is the best option IMO.
AA
 
ladder13 said:
Justice Department finalizes tighter regulations on gun stabilizing braces | PBS NewsHour.



“Pistol-stabilizing braces transform a handgun into a weapon with a similarly dangerous combination of being powerful and easy to conceal, said Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Today’s rule makes clear that firearm manufacturers, dealers, and individuals cannot evade these important public safety protections simply by adding accessories to pistols that transform them into short-barreled rifles,” Garland said.

“Simply put, this rule enhances public safety,” said Steven Dettelbach, director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.”


So it was ok to “evade these important public safety protections” previously by paying $200 and now going forward by getting a free stamp? :confused::confused: :confused::confused:
Click to expand...

So what they did was to make the firearms even easier to conceal, and harder to control. Perfect recipe for public safety.
 
If something was acquired legally, the NICS would have given a number to place on the 4473. That, to me, is a signature the purchase is 100% legal by the law. Maybe the time is coming to change the lawmakers if they let this lay.

This reminds me of a dead deer I have seen on the side of a well-travelled road for weeks. Had I have seen it first day or two, I most likely would have pulled over safely and out of traffic to move the carcass out of my sight, and out of children's sights. Law against that? Do your job. We pay you.
 
Last edited:
At the moment, all I’m gonna do is make lemonade. I’ve intended to SBR my Springfield Saint ever since I bought it, and now I can do it free. My Senators and Representative are solidly against this ruling, but I sent them a note anyway. Everyone should do the same, regardless of whatever their reps established position may be . . .
 
I sent politely worded emails voicing my concerns to Representative Greg Hardman and Senators Rob Portman and Sherrod Brown.

I anxiously await my rubber stamped apologetic rejection slips.
 
Montana state law will prevent this from being enforced by state and local law enforcement. Don't think I'll see feds at my door for 1 or 2 pistol braces, so eh.

There's no way this stands up anyway. There will be an injunction or stay put on it soon.
 
Rob613 said:
Montana state law will prevent this from being enforced by state and local law enforcement. Don't think I'll see feds at my door for 1 or 2 pistol braces, so eh.

There's no way this stands up anyway. There will be an injunction or stay put on it soon.
Click to expand...


Agreed. It will be legally challenged. And while that is going on there will be massive non-compliance.

But I guess I'll have to remove the AR pistol from under my back seat till this blows over.
 
This reminds me of the movie "Gladiator".

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWsCNPEwdxM[/ame]
 
I remember the first time I saw a pistol "brace". The person with excitedly explained it was legal.

I shook my head and stated before this is all over, somebody is going to get bent over on this. It was a nice try of trickery, fakery and obfuscation, but it's a stock...and it's an SBR.

If you don't like the NFA, that's a whole 'nother thing. But, this fits in the NFA as written. Sorry, just my opinion.
Click to expand...

That is a valid argument. I shook my head, too.

However, it is equally valid to argue that the ATF ruled that the braces were legal, millions were sold, and now the ATF has decided to change its mind. For money? Maybe. For political correctness? Likely.

BUT!

In pertinent part, Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution of the United States of America (some people don't like this document - ever wonder why?):

Section 9.

,,,

No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.,,,,

Emphasis added.

What Constitutes Punishment

In the often-cited case of Beazell v. Ohio, 269 U.S. 167 (1925), the Supreme Court defined the scope of the constitutional ex post facto restrictions:

"It is settled, by decisions of this Court so well known that their citation may be dispensed with, that any statute which punishes as a crime an act previously committed, which was innocent when done, which makes more burdensome the punishment for a crime, after its commission, or which deprives one charged with crime of any defense available according to law at the time when the act was committed, is prohibited as ex post facto."
Click to expand...

(c) Cornell Law

"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. "

As the ATF cannot pass statutes one can argue that this rule is ineffective from the outset.

As ATF is a creature of Congress, and if Congress cannot pass such a law, then neither can the ATF, and since the act being described was deemed legal by the ATF they cannot now be heard to criminalize it. The 120 day free period doesn't make the rule "nicer" or "legal".

Full employment for lawyers................................:rolleyes:
 
Am I the only one who pointed out the ATF does not have the autjhority to waive Tax Stamp tax collection? Only Congress can with a law change. That would require revisiting the NFA.
 
Last edited:
The timing is interesting,
The new Congress announces investigations into the regime and they not only suddenly have an interest to visit a sanitzed area near the border ( nothing to see here folks) they then drop the "CAR O LAGO" news of massive mishandling of Classified material and storing it in Chinese Communist funded think tank offices (oh and btw we've been hiding it for months).

Someone alot smarter than me says:
" I dont believe in conspiracy theories but I dont believe in coincidences either" ...
Seems a quick easy headline grab in the news was necessary to shift the narrative away from multiple felonies they suddenly want to be forthright with just prior to the investigations.

IOW pushing the illusion of making the country safer by banning evil bad guns was a diversionary tactic....expect more in the near future.
 
To those who just say - "Register them for free - what's the big deal" keep in mind states like California and NJ explicitly outlaw SBRs, so it's not an option to get a free tax stamp.

NJ does allow NFA Others which are not SBR's or pistols with arm braces added, but specifically manufactured and sold as an NFA Other. I wonder how the state or BATFE will address that? Will the BATFE now declare Others to be SBR's as well even though they don't meet the requirements? Who wants to be the test case?
 
For everyone who cites the Constitution, statutes, or case law, I have this, from my favorite Assistant US Attorney, who said to me during a fairly heated discussion about a case: “Call your first witness . . . “
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rpg
Let's say hypothetically I have an HK SP5 and own a brace but have never attached it. Under the new rule, I have to get a tax stamp and register it or destroy the arm brace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Zero tolerance canned
Replies
0
Views
446
ladder13
L
demkofour
  • Sticky
The History of Smith & Wesson Part 1
Replies
2
Views
920
robvious
robvious
Ματθιας
US Navy F-4 Phantom Blue Angels B-roll
Replies
3
Views
386
YeshuaIsa53
YeshuaIsa53
Mule Packer
Arming teachers and guardians in Utah schools.
Replies
10
Views
546
Bald1
Bald1
B
Dangerous Idiots Fastest Truck & Heavy Equipment Fails
Replies
3
Views
985
tlawler
tlawler

Latest posts

Back
Top