Brace Ban

[Cameramonkey]

Where were those suckers when we had 6 years of a house, senate, and white house controlled by people they had given tons of money and A+ ratings. Did they ask for anything? No. They just kept mumbling "enforce the existing laws, enforce the existing laws."

Yeah, not surprisingly, although the NRA is constantly emailing me, I have not heard one single solitary peep out of them on this subject.

 

[wagyu52]

[video=youtube_share;6UbBEi4dosg]https://youtu.be/6UbBEi4dosg[/video]

 

[Peacekeeper3073]

Yeah, not surprisingly, although the NRA is constantly emailing me, I have not heard one single solitary peep out of them on this subject.

Here is a little response from them. https://www.nraila.org/articles/20201217/nra-statement-on-the-atf-s-recent-actions

 

[bwframe]

With all of the loud vocal "not supporting the NRA" going on, let alone outright bashing, it seems odd that folks would wonder where they are on current issues?

Right or wrong, how much is expected from a financially crippled organization?

 

[Ggreen]

With all of the loud vocal "not supporting the NRA" going on, let alone outright bashing, it seems odd that folks would wonder where they are on issues?

Right or wrong, how much is expected from a financially crippled organization?

They were financially crippled long before the dirty wlp laundry got aired. Only pennies of every donated dollar went to defending the 2a, and then only what they deemed beneficial for the business of the nra. Lobbied for states to require nra concealed carry courses vs constitutional carry etc...

 

[bwframe]

Like I said...

 

[Ggreen]

Like I said...

If they want to recover with millennials they better cut Wayne's clothing allowance and start.

 

[bwframe]

Like I said...

 

[KellyinAvon]

HOT OFF THE PRESS!!! Full-disclosure: I don't own a pistol-length AR or brace of any kind. If anything is glaringly wrong let me know.

Senator/Representative,
I am writing to urge your support in not allowing pistol-length AR 15s and AK 47s with pistol stabilizing braces to be reclassified as items requiring registration under the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. The fact that the pistol brace accessory exists is a direct reaction to the NFA of 1934 and the subsequent bureaucracy created by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE).



It is particularly sinister that the BATFE would determine these items require registration for the estimated one million of these weapons, after having no problems with them for nearly a decade.


While this is an accessory to a firearm, the words “in common use at the time for lawful purposes” are definitely applicable. They were in the DC v Heller decision (2008), citing US v Miller (1938) concerning rights affirmed by the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Amendment.



Legislation (or in this case, a reinterpretation of an Executive Branch entity’s own rules) passed under emotional situations is rarely logical and tends to only impact the law-abiding. The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 is a prime example of such legislation. The $200 Tax Stamp required to take possession of firearms and accessories considered NFA-items was put in place to effectively double the price of a Thompson submachine gun. In 1934 very few law-abiding citizens could afford a Thompson, which was so connected to prohibition-era criminals. The Police, the Military, and criminals had Thompson submachine guns.



It is quite telling the BATFE will be offering a waiver of the $200 tax stamp for these braced-weapons. Make no mistake, this is an attempt to circumvent the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which specifically forbids the establishment of a federal registration system for non-NFA 1934 items. Carbine and rifle length AR 15s, AK 47s as well as standard ammunition magazines will be next if this egregious abuse of power isn’t stopped and stopped now.


Making pistol-length AR 15s and AK 47s with stabilizing braces NFA items requiring registration will not make anyone safer, nor will it will stop the onslaught of infringement on essential rights including that of self-defense. The bureaucracy driven by the NFA of 1934 has created an entity that makes its own rules, changes its own rules, reinterprets its own rules, and answers to no one. The answer to bad government is not more government.


Thank you,


Name
Address
Phone
e-mail

 

[2A-Hoosier23]

HOT OFF THE PRESS!!! Full-disclosure: I don't own a pistol-length AR or brace of any kind. If anything is glaringly wrong let me know.

Senator/Representative,
I am writing to urge your support in not allowing pistol-length AR 15s and AK 47s with pistol stabilizing braces to be reclassified as items requiring registration under the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. The fact that the pistol brace accessory exists is a direct reaction to the NFA of 1934 and the subsequent bureaucracy created by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE).



It is particularly sinister that the BATFE would determine these items require registration for the estimated one million of these weapons, after having no problems with them for nearly a decade.


While this is an accessory to a firearm, the words “in common use at the time for lawful purposes” are definitely applicable. They were in the DC v Heller decision (2008), citing US v Miller (1938) concerning rights affirmed by the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Amendment.



Legislation (or in this case, a reinterpretation of an Executive Branch entity’s own rules) passed under emotional situations is rarely logical and tends to only impact the law-abiding. The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 is a prime example of such legislation. The $200 Tax Stamp required to take possession of firearms and accessories considered NFA-items was put in place to effectively double the price of a Thompson submachine gun. In 1934 very few law-abiding citizens could afford a Thompson, which was so connected to prohibition-era criminals. The Police, the Military, and criminals had Thompson submachine guns.



It is quite telling the BATFE will be offering a waiver of the $200 tax stamp for these braced-weapons. Make no mistake, this is an attempt to circumvent the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which specifically forbids the establishment of a federal registration system for non-NFA 1934 items. Carbine and rifle length AR 15s, AK 47s as well as standard ammunition magazines will be next if this egregious abuse of power isn’t stopped and stopped now.


Making pistol-length AR 15s and AK 47s with stabilizing braces NFA items requiring registration will not make anyone safer, nor will it will stop the onslaught of infringement on essential rights including that of self-defense. The bureaucracy driven by the NFA of 1934 has created an entity that makes its own rules, changes its own rules, reinterprets its own rules, and answers to no one. The answer to bad government is not more government.


Thank you,


Name
Address
Phone
e-mail

Well-written. I've already contacted my reps but will send this template to friends and co-workers. Thank you!

 

[MindfulMan]

Thank you, Kelly.....perfect !

 

[WebSnyper]

Thank you, Kelly.....perfect !

Agreed, just used with some personal alterations that to contact both IN Senators. Appreciate you taking the time Kelly.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Well-written. I've already contacted my reps but will send this template to friends and co-workers. Thank you!

 

[KellyinAvon]

Thank you, Kelly.....perfect !

 

[KellyinAvon]

Agreed, just used with some personal alterations that to contact both IN Senators. Appreciate you taking the time Kelly.

I did cannibalize a previous draft on the subject. When you're a two-finger typist it's what you do.

 

[Hohn]

ATF form is now open for comment. Please avail yourself of the chance to comment here. Hit the "Comment now" button in the upper right.

My comment in total:

[FONT=&amp]I applaud the BATFE for undertaking an effort to introduce some objective criteria for the classification of weapons with stabilizing braces. But it is clear that the overall process involves several subjective aspects and that even if some objective criteria are established, the overall assessment is subjective. The problem will not be solved by introducing a couple objective criteria. It can only be solved by eliminating ALL subjective criteria.[/FONT][FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]If the assessment for classification were not subjective, there would be no need for BATFE review-- any manufacturer or maker could know conclusively by objective and measurable criteria whether any feature or combination of features of a firearm would cause it to fall within the purview of the NFA. A manufacturer need not get ATF to review whether a dimension is a given dimension because it is inherently objective and governed by physical, determinable qualities.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]But the BATFE here purports to divine "intent" from some rather arbitrarily defined criteria. It uses the phrase "objective design". But design intent is not objective and inherent to any design-- it is in the eye of the beholder. A primitive society of illiterate people would not look upon a stack of pencils and be inspired to write and develop written communication; rather they would see them as small sticks of wood useful for starting fires. And upon discovering the graphite inside, may harvest that graphite to use for metal casting. You only know a pencil is "designed for writing" because someone gave you a pencil and told you to write with it. It cannot be consistently and independently determined only from looking at the pencil.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Likewise, the utility of flat screwdriver as a prying tool suggest it has no objective design intent-- you only know it's good for driving screws because of the name of the tool or because someone showed it to you.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]The point is this: only the original designer of any object or feature can state what his or her design intent was. It CANNOT be empirically and fairly determined by any third party.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]As such, BATFE must forestall any efforts to ascertain "objective design intent" because such determination is irredeemably subjective and therefore inappropriate as a regulatory basis. All regulations must be as objective as possible. The design intent of any accessory must derive from giving legal force to a manufacturers stated design intent. Only a manufacturer has the standing to characterize the intent of any accessory or object. If Congress decided that the law is lacking robustness and has too many loopholes, it is the role of Congress alone to redraft the applicable legislation. It is *not* the purview of the BATFE to attempt to close loopholes in the law by creative re-imagining of the statutory language.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Objective Design Features (as opposed to objective design intent, which cannot be determined by BATFE) are measurable and definable and appropriate to use for classification, if objective criteria can be determined.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Unfortunately, the subjectivity problem shows up here as well:[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]-- Type and Caliber: What exactly is the measurable point at which a firearm becomes "awkward". What are the units of "awkwardness"? Is this some amount of Moment of Inertia? Overall firearm weight? How much recoil is too much to handle with one hand? Smith and Wesson has a 500 Magnum revolver that is classified as a handgun. How is that not too much recoil for one hand (2800 lb-ft of energy) while a 5.56 rifle caliber (with 1200 lb-ft of energy) is possibly excessive recoil?[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]-- Length of Pull. An appropriate maximum length of pull might be one based on the known distribution of American arm lengths. The max LOP could simply the length at which 99% of shooters would have the brace impinge upon the upper arm when it is at a 90 degree angle, making it too long to serve the bracing purpose. [/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]-- Attachment Method: The method of attachment is itself not an appropriate criterion. Rather, it is the degree of freedom afforded by any attachment-- the ability to exceed LOP. It's not the attachment-- it is the effect.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]There are more problems than can be addressed in this space. But the BATFE is attempting to replace one highly subjective process with another highly subjective process while passing it off as a step towards objectivity. And in doing so, it fails to show the "reasoned decisionmaking" required align its actions with the Administrative Procedures Act (see DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ET AL. v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ET AL 18-587.) [/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]In the end, the only defensible criterion for classification is whether the brace has no plausible use other than to make an NFA short-barrel rifle, and clearly all of the manufacturers (based on ATF guidance) have demonstrated a plausible non-NFA use for their products.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]ATF can plausibly add a data-backed maximum Length of Pull as a reasonable means of determining the point at which a brace would have no plausible non-NFA use.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]
[/FONT]

 

[88E30M50]

HOT OFF THE PRESS!!! Full-disclosure: I don't own a pistol-length AR or brace of any kind. If anything is glaringly wrong let me know.

Senator/Representative,
I am writing to urge your support in not allowing pistol-length AR 15s and AK 47s with pistol stabilizing braces to be reclassified as items requiring registration under the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. The fact that the pistol brace accessory exists is a direct reaction to the NFA of 1934 and the subsequent bureaucracy created by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE).



It is particularly sinister that the BATFE would determine these items require registration for the estimated one million of these weapons, after having no problems with them for nearly a decade.


While this is an accessory to a firearm, the words “in common use at the time for lawful purposes” are definitely applicable. They were in the DC v Heller decision (2008), citing US v Miller (1938) concerning rights affirmed by the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Amendment.



Legislation (or in this case, a reinterpretation of an Executive Branch entity’s own rules) passed under emotional situations is rarely logical and tends to only impact the law-abiding. The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 is a prime example of such legislation. The $200 Tax Stamp required to take possession of firearms and accessories considered NFA-items was put in place to effectively double the price of a Thompson submachine gun. In 1934 very few law-abiding citizens could afford a Thompson, which was so connected to prohibition-era criminals. The Police, the Military, and criminals had Thompson submachine guns.



It is quite telling the BATFE will be offering a waiver of the $200 tax stamp for these braced-weapons. Make no mistake, this is an attempt to circumvent the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which specifically forbids the establishment of a federal registration system for non-NFA 1934 items. Carbine and rifle length AR 15s, AK 47s as well as standard ammunition magazines will be next if this egregious abuse of power isn’t stopped and stopped now.


Making pistol-length AR 15s and AK 47s with stabilizing braces NFA items requiring registration will not make anyone safer, nor will it will stop the onslaught of infringement on essential rights including that of self-defense. The bureaucracy driven by the NFA of 1934 has created an entity that makes its own rules, changes its own rules, reinterprets its own rules, and answers to no one. The answer to bad government is not more government.


Thank you,


Name
Address
Phone
e-mail

Nicely written. I will be using this

 

[worddoer]

Submitted mine. I guess we will see if some dudes in black tac gear pound on my door and cause the premature demise of my K-9 shortly.

 

[thompal]

With all of the loud vocal "not supporting the NRA" going on, let alone outright bashing, it seems odd that folks would wonder where they are on current issues?

Right or wrong, how much is expected from a financially crippled organization?

The NRA gets bashed BECAUSE we have to ask them where they are on current issues. I think you are putting the cart before the horse.

 

[KellyinAvon]

The NRA gets bashed BECAUSE we have to ask them where they are on current issues. I think you are putting the cart before the horse.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/202...l-stabilizing-braces-and-unfinished-receivers

With this new “guidance,” ATF continues its pattern of making bureaucratic changes that put law-abiding Americans at risk of prosecution for a federal felony. These actions are completely incompatible with due process of law and our right to keep and bear arms.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20201220/atf-targets-law-abiding-pistol-brace-owners-again