National Could The Feds Simply Ban Pistol Braces With A Letter Or.. .

[Slobray]

Future sales sure, but if people legally purchased and now owned such items pre ban, a grandfather clause must be enacted or fair market compensation.

If neither of those things are granted it opens the entire thing up legal action which then can set precedent..
(given an unbiased SC, if it got that high)

If the bump stock ban is any indication, it looks as if millions of gun owner are going to be out hundreds of millions of dollars, via executive fiat.



Ray

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

If the bump stock ban is any indication, it looks as if millions of gun owner are going to be out hundreds of millions of dollars, via executive fiat.



Ray

We'll see. I heard of the ban, but no mass confiscation or mandatory turn in.. yet.
More like an unenforceable paper tiger ban for show.

 

[nwslopoke]

Future sales sure, but if people legally purchased and now owned such items pre ban, a grandfather clause must be enacted or fair market compensation.

If neither of those things are granted it opens the entire thing up legal action which then can set precedent..
(given an unbiased SC, if it got that high)

If we look at the vert grip issue, they do have a point since its based on facts and not emotion or biased opinion.

A pistol utilizing a brace without a mandatory functional need for a buffer tube or brace holding/mounting mechanism is an accessory and technically since it can be removed and still allow the pistol to function (unlike an AR pistol) with a vert grip installed means the measurement is from the barrel to the end of the receiver/frame.
So while it seems like a big biased deal, on paper it has logical fact based grounds.

Same goes for the 50 cal bolt action. Technically the receiver (loading area) is the upper itself. The lower is simply a stock mounting and firing surface.

So to me those rulings while lame, do make sense on paper.

Yes, I agree we shouldnt have such restraints.. But at the same time.. I dont see anything wildly biased with those two rulings. They make sense on paper. I disagree with them sure, but they make sense factually.

From the most recent spree of shootings, concealability didn't seem to be on their G.A.S. list. As with every attempt to limit and remove rights, it about the person pulling the trigger and not the equipment.

So far giving and inch here and an inch there hasn't gotten us anywhere.

 

[Ops]

all this dam limp dick waving

 

[The Heretic]

Typical. Blame the tool, not the idiot using it.

The 'tool' is Trump - not sure who is pulling his strings, but I don't think it is an idiot.

In short, I think Occam's Razor applies here; this is just too perfect to be coincidence.

 

[Jcon268]

The recent ATF letter changing how to measure a pistol (that got everyone up in arms about their VFG) changed braces to an accessory by excluding them from the overall length measurement of a gun. I saw this coming when that change was made. Not being able to put a VFG on a pistol was not what that change was about, it was about making braces accessories and not part of the gun. At that point they are easy to ban. Banning braces has been in the works for a while.

At some point, just about every accessory has been present on a gun used to commit murder. That doesn't a) mean that the accessory is linked to the crime or b) mean that it makes the gun any more lethal or enhance it's ability to be used in a lethal manner for ill purposes.

At least they had SOME stretched out, ridiculous reasoning upon which to "justify" the banning of bump stocks (speeds up rate of fire). If they find some reasoning to ban pistol braces then be ready. At that point they are, without a doubt, coming for all of your accessories and the firearms they are attached to - they just need a few more mass shootings to happen to justify it to the public.

 

[Jcon268]

Eventually, gun owners need to start digging in their heels hard and making it clear that their rights will not be marginalized. Wouldn't hurt to math out a plot of land where you won't be turning in your guns. They're about to start going full bore against the 2nd amendment and I presume things will get rather ugly before they get better.

 

[CaptJack]

The ATF has in the past went back and forth regarding the legality of pistol braces. It all started with the Sig Sauer pistol brace, it used to be the only one out. I've seen ATF letters outlawing them for a brief time then they back flipped and allowed them. At that point came many others like the blade etc.
I remember it clearly I had friends asking me what I was going to do since I had to AR pistols with Sig Sauer braces. I didn't have to wait long.

CaptJack

 

[GWS]

Methinks it's time to SBR my .300BLK pistol.

Plus 1 on that.
I've been procrastinating on this till today
Got prints and photo done
Will fill out the form tonight.

 

[Jcon268]

Plus 1 on that.
I've been procrastinating on this till today
Got prints and photo done
Will fill out the form tonight.

As much as I've wanted to SBR, I've always looked at it not only as asking a permission slip from the government but also letting them know that one is around. Just feels to me like it goes against the grain of the idea behind not registering. I thought about just SBRing one lower to have around and just keeping the pistol lower up until they try to pull the plug on it.

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

i think if people keep asking the ATF if its legal to shoulder their pistol brace, eventually the ATF could just change their ruling again.

 

[Jcon268]

i think if people keep asking the ATF if its legal to shoulder their pistol brace, eventually the ATF could just change their ruling again.

With so much information out there about the topic, it never ceases to amaze me how many people keep asking about it. The current opinion of the ATF has shown that, if you are using an ATF approved pistol brace and you happen to shoulder it, you have not shown intent to reconstruct the firearm as an SBR. Better put, you simply misused it. This was a 180 degree turn from the original opinion which was that shouldering in any capacity constituted a violation of NFA by turning the pistol into a SBR. Now, if you modify your brace in any way that can be construed by the ATF (and believe me, they WILL construe) as intended to redesign the brace for shouldering such as removing a strap, adding a pad or even apparently adding red loctite, you are now in violation of SBR laws. They gave us a way to not have to walk on eggshells constantly and people want to take it and run with it.

I'd love to see the NFA get repealed but until that day, no use seeing people getting locked up over such technicalities.

 

[44Brent]

So the question for everyone is will you vote for Trump or Biden? Will you simply not vote, or vote some third party candidate and surrender the presidency to Biden? How will bashing Trump improve our prospects?

I voted for Trump last time around and won't do it a second time. It matters little to me which one gets into office. Trump turned out to have lied on almost everything, except for his promises to have a trade war with China. I have as much at stake with Trump vs. the Democrats as I do with Crips vs. the Bloods.

 

[GWS]

As much as I've wanted to SBR, I've always looked at it not only as asking a permission slip from the government but also letting them know that one is around. Just feels to me like it goes against the grain of the idea behind not registering. I thought about just SBRing one lower to have around and just keeping the pistol lower up until they try to pull the plug on it.

Well, for me it's always been a part of an FU to my home state of California where full-auto, suppressors, SBR's and thermal sights have all been outlawed. Ergo I will have a suppressed SBR with thermal sights.
I will build it and jump through the hoops all so I can do a spiritual wienie wag at Gavin Newsome and the rest of the antigun libtards who wrecked what once was a truly great place to live.

 

[Boboclown]

Not good and it appears even some Republicans won't push back.

Why would they? They'd lose votes by not supporting our god emperor, Trump.

So the question for everyone is will you vote for Trump or Biden? Will you simply not vote, or vote some third party candidate and surrender the presidency to Biden?

E. All of the above. We put ourselves in the position of losing our rights.

 

[Alexx1401]

Amazing how short memories are. No one remembers the open bolt firearms, AR sears, street sweeper or Stryker 12 shotguns,....... Then they ask if they need congress to ban something? Really?
Then of course many who still wish Hilary had won can't wait to blame Trump. I guess they can't see all the gun owners who vote for people like Kate in OR.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

The recent ATF letter changing how to measure a pistol (that got everyone up in arms about their VFG) changed braces to an accessory by excluding them from the overall length measurement of a gun. I saw this coming when that change was made. Not being able to put a VFG on a pistol was not what that change was about, it was about making braces accessories and not part of the gun. At that point they are easy to ban. Banning braces has been in the works for a while.

No braces already were considered an accessory that is why they allow u to shoulder it in the most recent letter. The brace (accessory) does not change it to a two handed weapon in the atf's eyes and that is why it has been allowed.

The vertical foregrip is also an accessory that in the atf's eyes does change it to a two handed weapon. Vertical grips have not been allowed on firearms manufactured as handguns in the past so the so called "change" is nothing new and not part of some plan to ban braces.

The so called "change" from atf on measurement re vertical grips also happened well before the shooting involving a brace.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

With so much information out there about the topic, it never ceases to amaze me how many people keep asking about it. The current opinion of the ATF has shown that, if you are using an ATF approved pistol brace and you happen to shoulder it, you have not shown intent to reconstruct the firearm as an SBR. Better put, you simply misused it. This was a 180 degree turn from the original opinion which was that shouldering in any capacity constituted a violation of NFA by turning the pistol into a SBR. Now, if you modify your brace in any way that can be construed by the ATF (and believe me, they WILL construe) as intended to redesign the brace for shouldering such as removing a strap, adding a pad or even apparently adding red loctite, you are now in violation of SBR laws. They gave us a way to not have to walk on eggshells constantly and people want to take it and run with it.

I'd love to see the NFA get repealed but until that day, no use seeing people getting locked up over such technicalities.

Re "With so much information out there about the topic, it never ceases to amaze me how many people keep asking about it." I totally agree.

A good rule of thumb when dealing with the government is, "if you ask a question enough times, eventually you will get an answer you don't want to hear."

 

[Member 34319]

Methinks it's time to SBR my .300BLK pistol.

No joke.

If they ban em, that one month wait on efile form one jumps to a year as everyone floods the registry.

Once I get settled at the new address, I'm putting in for everything braced.

 

[Patriot1775]

Executive orders need to be banned. They give WAYYYY to much power to one person.

Executive Orders are issued by the President is to help officers and agencies of the executive branch to manage the operations within the Federal Government. Somewhere they were abused, probably Clinton. They are not to used to circumvent Congress etc. like Obozo the Kenyan Clown did.