National ATF coming for pistol braces

[The Heretic]

Really?

View attachment 902265

View attachment 902266
View attachment 902267
View attachment 902272
View attachment 902273
View attachment 902274

I didn't say they did not exist, just that they were not that common.

I am not making excuses for the ATF, just trying to understand how they came up with the checklist.

 

[titsonritz]

I didn't say they did not exist, just that they were not that common.

I am not making excuses for the ATF, just trying to understand how they came up with the checklist.

Easy, they came up with every conceivable way to screw over people and made their check list. If you are looking for anything resembling logic or sanity from this group of gun-grabbers you'll achieve more pissing against the wind.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Says who?

Says the market and the numbers of these versus stuff like Hi Points, Glocks, 1911s, M92s, Tauruses, .38 specials, .380acps...

 

[titsonritz]

Says the market and the numbers of these versus stuff like Hi Points, Glocks, 1911s, M92s, Tauruses, .38 specials, .380acps...

So based on the market and the numbers a .416 Rigby Mauser isn't a conventional rifle?

 

[The Heretic]

So based on the market and the numbers a .416 Rigby Mauser isn't a conventional rifle?

It is a conventional rifle, just not a common conventional rifle.

Context matters. I did not say that these are not conventional, I said (emphasis added):

at what items are not usual on a "conventional" handgun (not an AR/AK/etc.).

"Rifle sights" are not usually found on a Glock or a revolver.

Optics with eye relief of less than say, six inches, are typically not found on a conventional handgun like a Glock or revolver - for obvious reasons, but may commonly be found on an AR/AK "pistol" with a brace.

Ditto with bipods - not very common on conventional handguns.

 

[titsonritz]

It is a conventional rifle, just not a common conventional rifle.

Context matters. I did not say that these are not conventional, I said (emphasis added):

Point being, it shouldn't fuking matter if someone wants a bipod on their damn pistol, any pistol. They whine and make a point system to combat "Saturday Night Specials" because they are small, now here they are crying about pistols being too big. Pretty easy to spin whatever narrative they want and stack the deck.

 

[The Heretic]

Point being, it should fuking matter if someone wants a bipod on their damn pistol, any pistol. They whine and make a point system to combat "Saturday Night Specials" because they are small, now here they are crying about pistols being too big. Pretty easy to spin whatever narrative they want and stack the deck.

If some law abiding citizen wants an SBR/SBS, grenade launcher, RPG, belt fed HMG, etc. without having to wait a year and pay $200, I am all for it. No argument from me there.

Just saying it seems to me that this is how the ATF came up with these "points". It may seem stupid and arbitrary, but I could see how they are possibly thinking - NOT that I agree with their thinking - I just understand how they possibly came up with these ideas.

 

[titsonritz]

 

[Knebel]

An AK actually has pistol sights. What I foud out so far is, that 'rifle sights' are 'usually' aperture sights.

 

[ssubwave]

Who cares, they don't hide it anymore

 

[American123]

I didn't say they did not exist, just that they were not that common.

I am not making excuses for the ATF, just trying to understand how they came up with the checklist.

Trying to apply logic and reasonableness how this was concocted is like trying to fit a square peg into a smaller, round hole.

It can be safely assumed that the thought and intent behind this latest shenanigan was devoid of both logic and reasonableness and was in fact entirely devised to, again, subvert the intent of the rights described in the constitution.

 

[ma96782]

Yeah....didn't you see that the hand writing was on the wall?

MSN

Aloha, Mark

 

[Ura-Ki]

I sense mass non compliance here, how do they think they can make any of this stick? Yea, me neither!
The ATF and Biden are gonna be very disappointed when they check on their new bank account and find nothing but dust bunnies! Can't tax me on something just because you think I might own something, so, yea good luck with that!

 

[ar man]

All i can say is Come and get it.
Not our problem biden wanted to hand out money like tictacs and now hes try to collect.

 

[kylej24]

Just another tax on your average Joe. Imagine paying $200.00 to an entity to trample our rights so they have get more power to further trample our rights.

 

[American123]

Since they can and are willing to just print money out of thin air to pay bills, they can do that and I'll be keeping my fiat currency.

 

[Longwalkhome]

I think forward, the future compared to now. Your NFA transfers jumped to taking over a year when the folks bought a ton of suppressors. Just imagine the backlog and wait times for the paper work to get done.

15,000,000 Ar 15s plus every other semi auto that uses a magazine. Government will be twenty years doing the paperwork. No really they are dumb in my opinion.

What is the status of your firearm as you wait?

 

[Hueco]

I have a hard time believing that the ATF can simply change a rule and suddenly require millions of gun owners to pay up for a previously legal weapon without any input from Congress.

Seems to me that such a rule change would directly contradict with Heller's common use principal.

Either way, I don't see any future where more than 1% of gun owners cough up $200 per weapon.

If the Dems were serious about getting people to turn things in, they'd sweeten the pot. I would gladly trade 1 AR for allodial title to my property. If they really believe that it's such a terrible weapon, then I see no reason why relieving me of all future property taxes isn't a fair bargain to get this evil, evil weapon out of my safe and into federal hands.

 

[arakboss]

The article states that you would have to radically change the firearm. Wouldn't a simple barrel swap to a 16 inch or greater barrel length fix the problem.

 

[Longwalkhome]

I have a hard time believing that the ATF can simply change a rule and suddenly require millions of gun owners to pay up for a previously legal weapon without any input from Congress.

Seems to me that such a rule change would directly contradict with Heller's common use principal.

Either way, I don't see any future where more than 1% of gun owners cough up $200 per weapon.

If the Dems were serious about getting people to turn things in, they'd sweeten the pot. I would gladly trade 1 AR for allodial title to my property. If they really believe that it's such a terrible weapon, then I see no reason why relieving me of all future property taxes isn't a fair bargain to get this evil, evil weapon out of my safe and into federal hands.

They did the rule change with full autos, there was a time full autos had no tax.

Just saying they might do the same thing to semis that they did to full, stop all production and drive the prices up so the common man can't afford them.