National Pistol Brace rule Dropped!

[ilikegunspdx]

I don't know anything but just for the sake of discussion I look at a big picture.

If you add up all the braces out there it's said to be up to 40 million.

In order to convict a person the brace has to be on the gun and in someone's possession.

Odds are the government knows everyone who owns a brace that bought with a credit card.

Just guessing but having the brace on a gun will be a "add on" crime to other crimes.

Just like being a drug addict having a gun, it's an add on crime.

Today's laws are about control, with 7 billion people on the planet there is a big movement to gain full control. A constant stream of laws and regulations are used to steal your rights by making us criminals. There are all kinds of tools being used now to make us criminals.

Re being an add-on crime. We don't know that yet. Anything that is left to the discretion of a Leo Fe can be enforced. Fe let's say the head of Oregon state patrol (OSP), who was appointed by Kate brown after the old one quit, gives a directive for officers to charge people. OSP rolls up on you in the woods and then officer has discretion to charge you or not.

I know of one OSP prick who will charge anyone with anything he possibly can. He is an outlier but I guarantee he would charge you if he could, irregardless of whether he got direction from higher up to do it.

Also if you look at places like CA and NY that have become totally anti-gun, cops are looking for gun violations and charging people all the time. WA and OR aren't there yet but are certainly heading that way and may be just the same in the future (god forbid).

 

[Longwalkhome]

Re being an add-on crime. We don't know that yet. Anything that is left to the discretion of a Leo Fe can be enforced. Fe let's say the head of Oregon state patrol (OSP), who was appointed by Kate brown after the old one quit, gives a directive for officers to charge people. OSP rolls up on you in the woods and then officer has discretion to charge you or not.

I know of one OSP prick who will charge anyone with anything he possibly can. He is an outlier but I guarantee he would charge you if he could, irregardless of whether he got direction from higher up to do it.

More likely a man's "friends" or family will turn him in. A divorce or jealous friend is worse than a few random cops with egos.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Re being an add-on crime. We don't know that yet. Anything that is left to the discretion of a Leo Fe can be enforced. Fe let's say the head of Oregon state patrol (OSP), who was appointed by Kate brown after the old one quit, gives a directive for officers to charge people. OSP rolls up on you in the woods and then officer has discretion to charge you or not.

I know of one OSP prick who will charge anyone with anything he possibly can. He is an outlier but I guarantee he would charge you if he could, irregardless of whether he got direction from higher up to do it.

Also if you look at places like CA and NY that have become totally anti-gun, cops are looking for gun violations and charging people all the time. WA and OR aren't there yet but are certainly heading that way and may be just the same in the future (god forbid).

Out of what, 490-500 OSP Troopers?

 

[CamoDeafie]

More likely a man's "friends" or family will turn him in. A divorce or jealous friend is worse than a few random cops with egos.

Also what factored into my decision. Especially the "family" part, particularly the inlaws.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Out of what, 490-500 OSP Troopers?

I wouldn't want to rely on the "discretion" of any trooper (or Leo, except maybe sherriffs) you never know who is going to pull you over. That prick OSP guy pulled me over for 3 mph over the speed limit. And that's driving a normal zero attention getting sedan. He does it just to snoop to see if he can find something. He was probably picked on a lot in grade school and wants revenge or something.

 

[CamoDeafie]

I wouldn't want to rely on the "discretion" of any trooper (or Leo, except maybe sherriffs) you never know who is going to pull you over. That prick OSP guy pulled me over for 3 mph over the speed limit. And that's driving a normal zero attention getting sedan. He does it just to snoop to see if he can find something. He was probably picked on a lot in grade school and wants revenge or something.

I'm just saying if 1 OSP is a prick out of 500 Troopers, good chances there's other pricks.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I'm just saying if 1 OSP is a prick out of 500 Troopers, good chances there's other pricks.

Ah I hear you I thought you were saying the opposite.

One time I pulled over in really wide gravel lot next to highway so I could talk on phone. I was a good 30 feet from the road and parked. He pulls next to me and stares at me for like 5 minutes. Sort of like "I dare you to drive away while you are on your phone." I guess that's what he was doing anyway. Some people are just pricks. And some of those work in law enforcement unfortunately.

 

[Longwalkhome]

Also what factored into my decision. Especially the "family" part, particularly the inlaws.

Honestly men will screw themselves and not realize they are doing it. They tell the world on the net what they own and even post pictures. The net is not our friend but a spy, of course that sounds paranoid but it's true. Look at all the people canceled over past post, what's on the net is there forever.

 

[Longwalkhome]

I wouldn't want to rely on the "discretion" of any trooper (or Leo, except maybe sherriffs) you never know who is going to pull you over. That prick OSP guy pulled me over for 3 mph over the speed limit. And that's driving a normal zero attention getting sedan. He does it just to snoop to see if he can find something. He was probably picked on a lot in grade school and wants revenge or something.

I got pulled over doing 70 in a 55 and the State cop gave me a verbal warning. Not every cop is a jerk but if you keep meeting them a lot you will find one.

 

[Yarome]

Hypothetical question and one that I'm actually curious about..


Regardless of which way the Federal District Courts rule regarding the brace ruling...

If and When it gets to SCOTUS;

What are you "don't comply, never comply" people going to do, if in say, a 5-4 decision; the SCOTUS rules that the ATF has the right and ability to do such a thing as the pistol brace Final rule, and allows them to enforce it? Continue to not comply?
Just saying, the fact that there's a 6-3 conservative majority is no guarantee that a majority will rule in our favor.

Remember; Thompson/Center Arms, Staples, Heller, Macdonald, Caetano, Bruen and other 2A cases have consistently stated that "some regulations are okay, some prohibitions are allowed, dangerous and unusual weapons can and should be regulated".

The danger is that 2 conservative Justices could very well side with the three Statist liberal/leftist Justices.

Let me paraphrase your question and see if I got it right before replying.

"For those that choose to not comply, even in light of a SCOTUS decision to allow the rule.. please detail in a public forum how you plan to violate federal law."

Sound about right?

Hard PASS!

 

[CamoDeafie]

Let me paraphrase your question and see if I got it right before replying.

"For those that choose to not comply, even in light of a SCOTUS decision to allow the rule.. please detail in a public forum how you plan to violate federal law."

Sound about right?

Hard PASS!

Not quite the direction I was going for

More of... what legally are they gonna do? Sure would be nice to vote the entire lot of Statist bums out and install pro Constitution not-bums in, sack Garland and Dettelbach, pass a bill(s) to repeal gun control laws, and abolish what's left of the BATFE... but.. seeing how people have voted last few times... about the same chances as me getting a blow from 1997 Winona Wyder

 

[Longwalkhome]

People should explore the consequences of a new law but normally it's tunnel vision they think about.

Yep the ATF lied to the owners of braces and called the brace illegal after millions were sold.

Consequences run a full gamut from never trusting the word of government to creating about 40 million gun owners changing there less accurate pistol into more accurate rifles.

Reminded me of the state of Oregon decades ago holding hearings on banning all handguns in Oregon. They wouldn't let a bunch of us in to testify but I did manage to talk to the State cop that was next up to speak. I asked him was it really smart to take away the hand guns and the criminals start using rifles and shotguns?

Apparently once the consequences were thought out the state didn't ban handguns.

 

[Yarome]

Not quite the direction I was going for

More of... what legally are they gonna do? Sure would be nice to vote the entire lot of Statist bums out and install pro Constitution not-bums in, sack Garland and Dettelbach, pass a bill(s) to repeal gun control laws, and abolish what's left of the BATFE... but.. seeing how people have voted last few times... about the same chances as me getting a blow from 1997 Winona Wyder

I got that, but you know me. The temptation is too great and can never pass up an opportunity to mess with folks.

I can't speak for all, but I firmly believe in, "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." But in all honesty, I think a SCOTUS decision in favor of the alphabet would completely change the landscape and views of many of those resistant to compliance. There is a big difference when something is, by the highest authority, now "the law of the land" and simply a bureaucratic and unconstitutional "rule".

There would still be a small percentage that refuse to comply, however, I would bet the vast majority of current non-compliers would fall in line... one way or another... if that were to happen. Owning a singular type of firearm is simply not worth the risk to their liberties.

 

[RX-79G]

There would still be a small percentage that refuse to comply, however, I would bet the vast majority of current non-compliers would fall in line... one way or another... if that were to happen. Owning a singular type of firearm is simply not worth the risk to their liberties.

Yeah, it's a lot to ask for a piece of plastic.

 

[CamoDeafie]

I got that, but you know me. The temptation is too great and can never pass up an opportunity to mess with folks.

I can't speak for all, but I firmly believe in, "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." But in all honesty, I think a SCOTUS decision in favor of the alphabet would completely change the landscape and views of many of those resistant to compliance. There is a big difference when something is, by the highest authority, now "the law of the land" and simply a bureaucratic and unconstitutional "rule".

There would still be a small percentage that refuse to comply, however, I would bet the vast majority of current non-compliers would fall in line... one way or another... if that were to happen. Owning a singular type of firearm is simply not worth the risk to their liberties.

Like I've said.. pretty much every SCOTUS decision since 1992ish (Thompson/Center Arms) have left the NFA,GCA, FOPA alone. So... there's a history of SCOTUS ruling largely in favor of 2A except for these three Federal Laws.

 

[vanlab]

This thread has turned into a circle....ah nevermind

 

[PiratePast40]

This thread has turned into a circle....ah nevermind

It's a complex and emotional issue. Many are venting and anger sometimes get in the way. Kudos to the mods for allowing the discussion to continue and posting warnings when needed.

 

[MikeInOr]

Not the route I took but some people did benefit from a cheaper SBR.

I picked up 3 sbr taxstamps (but there weren't any actual taxstamps on my approved docs) for pistols I never would have paid $200 to get a sbr taxstamp for. I.e
PC charger and Keltec CP33.
All of them will wear folding stocks which I really like. I have never been much of a brace guy.

Yes, I paid over $20 for each set of fingerprints. Which made the registration definitely not free... But I still saved $600.

I believe in taking advantage of an opportunity when it presents itself.

The whole registration fiasco kind of made me question the whole bluff that the ATF has been pushing over on gun owners. I don't actually have to have the tax stamp on me when using the SBR's, I just have to be able to produce the "TaxStamp" / doc if an "ATF agent" asks to see it. Nothing about the local sheriff or cop that I can find. In 40 years of shooting in the woods I have never even seen an ATF agent. I have actually never seen a real live ATF agent in person. The closest I have seen is ATF agents dicking with "people of interest" that they have targeted and gone out of their way to entrap... on the evening news.

Now the the ATF has created millions of "rule breaker" criminals what do they plan to do with all of them? Maybe they felt it has been too long since they had any really bad press coverage and they needed something new to further tarnish their reputation? Enforce the new "rule" and look like even bigger gung-ho behind holes than they already do or don't enforce the new "rule" and look even wimpier and less effective than they already are? It doesn't really matter to me since I am legal but the ATF sure seems to be a lot more bluff than action.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

The closest I have seen is ATF agents dicking with "people of interest" that they have targeted and gone out of their way to entrap... on the evening news.

I've also seen some of those, but more often than not it's the "people of interest" that have gone out of their way to entice the ATF

 

[MikeInOr]

I've also seen some of those, but more often than not it's the "people of interest" that have gone out of their way to entice the ATF

Yes, exactly! I had no interest in flocking to the "Malheur National Wildlife Refuge" when that was going on.