ATF Coming After Firearms with Stabilizing Braces

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • ed bernay

    Active Member
    Feb 18, 2011
    184
    They aren’t. Originally NFA was going to apply to ALL firearms with a short barrel. The plan was to make handguns available only to the rich and the government. But it got diluted because there was enough push back. But not enough to ban “unusual” firearms that were “particularly concealable”. It’s a gangland America law. Keep in mind what was occurring at the time.

    Context matters.

    Makes no sense today. Kind of didn’t then, but they didn’t mind trampling some rights in an attempt to make it harder for gangsters.

    I have read a little about the history of NFA. I do respectfully disagree with the inference that "gangland America" permits politicians the ability to violate rights of law abiding Americans. I suspect you don't agree with that inference and were just relaying what you believe the justification was then. However, politicians today would use "mass shootings" as their justification.

    Based on what I have read about the roaring 20s and 30s, most gangsters stole their weapons from national guard armories and police stations. I have not researched to verify the accuracy of that claim but that is what I read. Regardless, when the ATF classifies the use of arm braces on pistols as SBRs, the scenario I gave should be the method of attacking it. Not even addressing the constitutional question, SBRs would not even pass rational basis then or today. Just my opinion.
     

    AssMan

    Meh...
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 27, 2011
    16,217
    Somewhere on the James River, VA
    SB Mini with a reflex sight passes easily. Most of the "pistols" people are using these days wouldn't, because, surprise, they are not actually being used as pistols, they are being used as SBRs. "I need help lifting a rifle" and "my pistol weighs 8.5lbs" are not statements easy to reconcile with each other.

    Would I prefer they just deregulated SBRs? YES, and I own a dozen of them. But that's not realistically in the cards at this time.


    Why do you think they need to do anything at all?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,678
    I have read a little about the history of NFA. I do respectfully disagree with the inference that "gangland America" permits politicians the ability to violate rights of law abiding Americans. I suspect you don't agree with that inference and were just relaying what you believe the justification was then. However, politicians today would use "mass shootings" as their justification.

    Based on what I have read about the roaring 20s and 30s, most gangsters stole their weapons from national guard armories and police stations. I have not researched to verify the accuracy of that claim but that is what I read. Regardless, when the ATF classifies the use of arm braces on pistols as SBRs, the scenario I gave should be the method of attacking it. Not even addressing the constitutional question, SBRs would not even pass rational basis then or today. Just my opinion.

    I didn’t say it was okay or it permitted in the moral sense. But that WAS the justification used and since it’s been the law for more than 80 years without the courts striking it down or congress getting rid of it since, I’d say in the end the circumstances off the time did permit congress to make sure a law. There were many restrictions during WWII we wouldn’t put up with today (and looking at the reaction by many to pandemic restrictions that were for the greater good of the vast majority, we didn’t put up with them today).

    Most gangsters didn’t steal their weapons. They bought their Thompson’s, colt monitors, etc. legally. There were a couple well know thefts.
     

    whistlersmother

    Peace through strength
    Jan 29, 2013
    8,948
    Fulton, MD
    Hoping liberals push (D) away from gun control is some magic smoke.

    It will be more of "I got mine, I don't care if its harder for everyone else"

    And they will continue voting "feelings" and to have their ears tickled.
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,690
    Congress doesn't write laws. Special interest lawyers write the laws and get politicians in Congress to sponsor them..."we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy" - Nancy Pelosi.

    A distinction without a difference. Special interests can write whatever they like; they need a legislative body to turn it into law. Then the legislative body hands off the vaguely written piece of crap to a bunch of unelected admin types to write regulatory interpretations that we all must live by, or go to jail.
     

    ed bernay

    Active Member
    Feb 18, 2011
    184
    A distinction without a difference. Special interests can write whatever they like; they need a legislative body to turn it into law. Then the legislative body hands off the vaguely written piece of crap to a bunch of unelected admin types to write regulatory interpretations that we all must live by, or go to jail.

    I believe this matters because the majority of the public thinks the legislative process is like the Schoolhouse Rock cartoon. They would be a lot more skeptical of legislation that takes away their freedom if they understood how it comes to fruition. Because many Republican politicians are part of the scam, it rarely gets discussed. Pro freedom media should be questioning politicians publicly about the detail of "their" legislation everyday. They should be asked daily to explain how a rifle with a 14.5 inch barrel and stock is so much more dangerous than a rifle with a 16 inch barrel and stock. They should be asked publicly who on their staff decided that part of the legislation. They need to be embarrassed everyday.
     

    Bountied

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 6, 2012
    6,894
    Pasadena
    When is this proposed to go into effect? Sorry if this is a dupe. You can print out form 4999 from the link if you want to score your things at home. I will be, just for poops and chuckles.
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,678
    When is this proposed to go into effect? Sorry if this is a dupe. You can print out form 4999 from the link if you want to score your things at home. I will be, just for poops and chuckles.

    IIRC a minimum of 90 days after it is published in the federal register for comments. But they generally take in to account comments after the 90 day comment period and Will then publish the final regulation, which is, I think 30 days after the final is published. So figure likely between 5-8 months.
     

    Decoy

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 2, 2007
    4,926
    Dystopia
    The founder of SB Tactical just said that the congressional research service has found that there may be as many as 10-40 MILLION pistol braces.

     

    outrider58

    Eats Bacon Raw
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    49,818
    The founder of SB Tactical just said that the congressional research service has found that there may be as many as 10-40 MILLION pistol braces.



    ...and none are registered. like I said, no one's 'coming' for your braces.

    And like I've been saying for years, stop going on u-toob, shooting your pistols while shouldering your braces. :cool:
     

    Decoy

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 2, 2007
    4,926
    Dystopia

    TinCuda

    Sky Captain
    Apr 26, 2016
    1,556
    Texas
    civil war among who gun owners and none gun owners? dont think that will work

    I understand your humor but I think these shenanigans are the first steps in dissolving this country and completely doing away with our Constitution. I honestly believe the left wants to force everyone into their controlled faux Utopia by any means.
     

    TinCuda

    Sky Captain
    Apr 26, 2016
    1,556
    Texas
    Depending on sources, there are still up to 70% of the population that agrees in some form with controls on "Assault Weapons". That's the issue that will be the flash point for many.

    I have seen some of these polls. The questions read like: Do you think that a two year old child should be allowed to play with a loaded full auto "assault rifle" with the safety off?

    If you answer "NO" to the question, PRESTO!! You're now counted as pro gun control.
     

    KIBarrister

    Opinionated Libertarian
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 10, 2013
    3,923
    Kent Island/Centreville
    [...] it’s been the law for more than 80 years without the courts striking it down or congress getting rid of it since, I’d say in the end the circumstances off the time did permit congress to make sure a law.

    To be fair, I’m not aware of a major court challenge to the NFA since Heller and its progeny. That is relevant because even though the 2A is a fundamental right, it has historically been given a lower level of scrutiny than what is due. I don’t see how the NFA could survive strict scrutiny in front of any judge that actually knows the difference between their posterior and the ole’ hole in the ground.
     

    pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,948
    Marylandstan
    Due process, or fairness, is one of the fundamental principles of United States democracy and the United States Constitution. Laws that violate your due process rights are thus considered to be unconstitutional. An ex post facto law is considered to be unconstitutional.

    Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws).
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,927
    Messages
    7,259,351
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom