JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
5,296
Reactions
4,917
Ive been seeing dealers, Armslist and Gunbroker selling AR pistols with SBA3 braces on them without any restriction?

I thought at this point, except for certain groups party to lawsuits, you could not have a brace on a pistol without doing the dog & pony show with the ATF...

Are these guys ignorant? "not complying" or am I missing something?


Aside from complete firearms... can braces even be sold anymore? Looking on some retailers websites they show them as not available... with they sold out or pulled them?


Anyone know?

If a person had a couple of braces lying around, can they be sold privately? Would anyone still buy it even?


Ive been following 2A issues and laws for decades, but somehow the details of this one whizzed by me
 
Agreed about the fuzzy details on this. I removed and got rid of the ones that I had because it was not clear at all and knowing my luck I'd get into trouble.
 
BraceRule.jpg

 
I watched the video and it seems like he is basing his assumption on the injunction being nationwide because of the word "entirety". He also said he thinks the ATF will be afraid to appeal the district court decision because it will go through the 5th Circuit. But then he suggest that it will end up at the Supreme Court. If the ATF doesn't appeal the decision, why would it go to Supreme Court?
 
I had to fast forward to the part discussing why he thinks it applies nationwide. I am not convinced but my legal training consisted of watching Perry Mason reruns.

Edit: My guess is the ATF will crack some braced pistol sellers heads outside of this District Court's area. Probably in a District covered by a more ATF friendly court.
 
Last Edited:
people complying with this crap make me laugh, honestly complying with anything
Do you really think that Congress will repeal, or even SCOTUS will dismantle parts or whole of NFA 1934, GCA 1968, FOPA Hughes Amendment? :rolleyes:

Edit. I'm just saying, ever since Miller, Heller, McDonald, Bruen; the SCOTUS have avoided saying or applying anything to NFA 1934, GCA 1968 laws, and FOPA 1986's Hughes Amendment...
 
Judge Kacsmaryk has now taken things a step further in the related Britto case. His ruling stays enforcement of the law as it applies to everyone across the country.

That's a significant departure from Judge O'Connor's ruling, where he rejected a request to extend his preliminary injunction to all braced gun owners.

"The Court declines Plaintiffs' invitation to extend the scope of the injunctive relief 'nationwide,'" he wrote. "Injunctive relief reflecting that previously afforded by the Fifth Circuit to Plaintiffs is sufficiently limited to 'not provide relief beyond the parties to the case,' while also affording sufficient relief to meet each Plaintiff's present needs."

The Fifth Circuit panel had also cautioned against issuing a nationwide injunction, a far-reaching type of order the Supreme Court has cast a skeptical eye towards in recent years. However, the panel also noted there were situations where a nationwide effect could be justified.

"Still, in certain
"Still, in certain circumstances, nationwide relief is appropriate and may be necessary for the benefit of all parties," Judge Smith wrote. "In Feds for Medical Freedom, for example, the en banc court permitted a nationwide injunction because the organization's membership numbered thousands, and the members were scattered nationwide. In those circumstances, we reasoned that 'limiting the relief to only those before [the court] would prove unwieldy and would only cause more confusion.' Moreover, injunctions should be crafted to 'provide complete relief to the plaintiffs.'"

 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

Back Top