Long Term Plan for Banning Braced Pistols

[BSA1]

I am starting a new topic as a previous one has turned into a finger pointing debate between who is the worst to blame; The Greatest Generation or The Baby Boomers.

I think in long term strategies in problem solving. When it comes to the anti2a's I believe it is their game plan;

Create a new category in the NFA and place braced pistols in it.

When the Libs and Anti-2A gain control of Congress and a willing President is elected pass a law closing the pistol registry as was done in 1986 with full auto weapons. This time they have a mass media firmly committed to the banning of all guns.

This actually can be accomplished in a relatively short period of time. Only 16 years elapsed between the time the 1968 GCA and closing the machine gun registry in 1986.

Then begin public "education" programs warning that unregistered braced pistols are illegal. Since they can no longer be legally transferred it is a simple matter of time of confiscation and/or destruction by owners.

 

[GaryS]

This will likely be settled by the federal courts. The NFA could be overturned inlight of Bruen, but I won't venture an opinion either way.

I expect suits to be filed in several federal circuits if not today by the end of the week.

Thanks for starting a new thread. The other one went off the rails and is useless.

 

[IrishFritz]

This is not new behavior for ATF. The have been a number of instances where previously legal firearms were retroactively made illegal. In one particular instance in the 1970's Browning imported a small number of otherwise stock FN-FALs in semi-auto with commercial blue and up- graded wood that they called "sporting " rifles. It turned out that the rifles could be converted to selective fire simply by replacing some trigger group parts with stock military parts. ATF reclassified these rifles as machine guns but allowed the owners to register the rifles without cost. The reasoning at the time was that law abiding good faith purchasers should not be held liable for an agency error. So, there is precedent to allow them to do what they are doing.
The real insidious result of the 1934 GCA was the precident set the the government had the right to designate certain types of firearms as against the public good and to control them through taxation that necessitated registration.
We have always been in jeopardy from the 1934 GCA and although it will be practically impossible to do so, if a way can be found to overturn the 1934 GCA it would be a great protection for us.

 

[GaryS]

Based on what Justice Thomas wrote in the majority opinion in Bruen, I would venture to guess that both the 1934 and 1986 laws could be overturned.

The "text and history" part of his ingenious opinion could well mean that absent a change to the Second Amendment many existing laws will be null and void.

Again, in case I've never mentioned it before I AM NOT A LAWYER, so my opinion is just that.

This is not new behavior for ATF. The have been a number of instances where previously legal firearms were retroactively made illegal. In one particular instance in the 1970's Browning imported a small number of otherwise stock FN-FALs in semi-auto with commercial blue and up- graded wood that they called "sporting " rifles. It turned out that the rifles could be converted to selective fire simply by replacing some trigger group parts with stock military parts. ATF reclassified these rifles as machine guns but allowed the owners to register the rifles without cost. The reasoning at the time was that law abiding good faith purchasers should not be held liable for an agency error. So, there is precedent to allow them to do what they are doing.
The real insidious result of the 1934 GCA was the precident set the the government had the right to designate certain types of firearms as against the public good and to control them through taxation that necessitated registration.
We have always been in jeopardy from the 1934 GCA and although it will be practically impossible to do so, if a way can be found to overturn the 1934 GCA it would be a great protection for us.

 

[bushmaster1313]

It took 200 years to get a ruling out of the Supreme Court that the 2A applied to people

It took another 14 years to get a ruling that people had a right to carry a gun outside the home.

IMHO it will take forever to get a ruling that overturning the BAFTE

What could happen is that the Supreme Court could rule that
Because the short barreled law was first found to apply to arm braces and then it was found to not apply, the short barreled law is void for vagueness. In other words, if the BATFE cannot get it right the first time there is something wrong with the law.

 

[GaryS]

I think you underestimate the importance of Bruen on 2A rights. Look at how many cases were subsequently "Granted, Vacated, and Remanded" (GVRed) by SCOTUS.

Those were cases where SCOTUS sent cases back to lower courts for "further consideration in light of Bruen."

Some of the lower courts are going to do some foot dragging, but those judges don't like to have SCOTUS reverse their decisions, so they will likely fall into line.

It took 200 years to get a ruling out of the Supreme Court that the 2A applied to people

It took another 14 years to get a ruling that people had a right to carry a gun outside the home.

IMHO it will take forever to get a ruling that overturning the BAFTE

What could happen is that the Supreme Court could rule that
Because the short barreled law was first found to apply to arm braces and then it was found to not apply, the short barreled law is void for vagueness. In other words, if the BATFE cannot get it right the first time there is something wrong with the law.

 

[ExRanger714]

see above

NFA=1934 GCA=1968

Embracing technicalities since 1952.

 

[LostintheOzone]

Bump stocks and braces isn't a 2A matter for the USSC to rule on. You can own a pistol or a rifle and the ATF is going to define that for you. NFA 1934.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, several states/cities have outright restricted some firearms and magazines. We have magazine restrictions in my state.

If there was a 2A issue here the USSC would have ruled on it already. It doesn't matter if the states/cities do it, or the fed. Case in point was Bruen (state) and Heller (city) The USSC doesn't care who's restricting your 2A. If they think there's a constitutional issue, they'll rule on it.

Braces are small potatoes in the general scheme of things. An out right restriction on keeping a firearm like McDonald or Bruen restricting your right to bear arms will get their attention. A brace on a SBR won't even move the needle on the USSC.

Sorry, but I just don't see any relief here coming from the USSC.

Addressing the OP. A congressional overhaul of NFA is coming. You can just about bet on it. Might include some pistols this time. We're just one election away.

 

[GaryS]

I believe you are incorrect. Bruen overruled a state law that restricted the right to bear arms outside the home.

That is less important than the reasoning that The Court used to make the decision.

Moving forward ALL gun laws will be looked at using the "text and history" of the laws regarding firearms at the time the Constitution was written.

We are going to see magazine bans, "Assault Rifle" bans, handgun rosters, and similar laws overturned.

Bump stocks and braces isn't a 2A matter for the USSC to rule on. You can own a pistol or a rifle and the ATF is going to define that for you. NFA 1934.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, several states/cities have outright restricted some firearms and magazines. We have magazine restrictions in my state.

If there was a 2A issue here the USSC would have ruled on it already. It doesn't matter if the states/cities do it, or the fed. Case in point was Bruen (state) and Heller (city) The USSC doesn't care who's restricting your 2A. If they think there's a constitutional issue, they'll rule on it.

Braces are small potatoes in the general scheme of things. An out right restriction on owning a firearm like McDonald or Bruen restricting your right to bear arms will get their attention. A brace on a SBR won't even move the needle on the USSC.

Sorry, but I just don't see any relief here coming from the USSC.

Addressing the OP. A congressional overhaul of NFA is coming. It will be AWB2 lite. You can just about bet on it.

 

[Beemer-mark]

"Long Term Plan for Banning Braced Pistols"

Banning of all firearms. Bit by bit.