ATF Coming After Firearms with Stabilizing Braces

TinCuda said:

If an argument is made that stabilizing braces are intended to circumnavigate the 1934 NFA by adding a pseudo stock on a pistol, couldn't an argument be made that a 16 inch rifle barrel also is intended to skate the NFA? I mean if you get right down to brass tacks, most rifles around the world were 20 inches. A barrel that was cut to 18" was considered pretty handy. Now, because of the 1934 NFA, all of a sudden all the rifles that were once short (AR15 clone of the M4 with a 14 inch barrel for example) are now 16.25 inch or something. You could argue that it is complying with the law but I say it is no different than arm braces. Technically they are complying with the law too, but just beyond the limit of the law.

Just something to help get people thinking out of the box.

Click to expand...

Bob A said:

Then there's the 18" limit on shotgun barrels. Why 18 and not 16? For that matter, why 16 and not 18? Then there's the Maryland 29" for SBRs . . .

GCA 1968 developed a formula to ban "Saturday Night Specials" from the hands of the back alley craps sharks; instead of ridding us of the Rohm category, it prevented such cheap dreck as the Walther PPK from falling into the hands of the unfit.

Arbitrary and capricious is what you get when you allow politics to trump reason.

Click to expand...

Thomas Jefferson Quote: “When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.”

Click to expand...

The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA or GCA68) is a U.S. federal law that regulates the firearms industry and firearms ownership. Due to constitutional limitations, the Act is primarily based on regulating interstate commerce in firearms by generally prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except by manufacturers, dealers and importers licensed under a scheme set up under the Act.

The GCA was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on October 22, 1968, and is Title I of the U.S. federal firearms laws. The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) is Title II. Both GCA and NFA are enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

GCA repealed the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, though many of its provisions were reenacted as part of the GCA, which revised the FFA and its predecessor, the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).[1]

Click to expand...

jcutonilli said:

According to Armed Scholar, the ATF brace rules will be released in Dec

Click to expand...

usa259 said:

so how long does it take to process the sbr paper work? which form is it?

Click to expand...

Kharn said:

Form 1, via Eform about 30 days.
But if Chevron deference gets a nip in the bud tomorrow in the EPA case, you might save $200 and see the ATF run away with their tail between their legs.

Click to expand...

kshaw said:

I agree. I am speculating that the EPA case will have a huge effect on ability of Executive Agencies to make regulations.

Click to expand...

kshaw said:

I agree. I am speculating that the EPA case will have a huge effect on ability of Executive Agencies to make regulations.

Click to expand...

Kharn said:

Form 1, via Eform about 30 days.
But if Chevron deference gets a nip in the bud tomorrow in the EPA case, you might save $200 and see the ATF run away with their tail between their legs.

Click to expand...

camo556 said:

is there anything other than a video suggesting a delay?

I have not seen anything official. here we are in July, before mid terms, when progressIves are clamoring for action. I tend to doubt that they will postpone it or let facts or adverse SC rulings get in the way.

I think that they will take the CDC route that they did last year: issue the rule, let the court smack in down, then blame the court ("well we tried, it's those damn right wing gun nuts on the court")

Click to expand...

Regulations.gov

www.regulations.gov

jcutonilli said:

Regulations.gov

www.regulations.gov

Click to expand...

usa259 said:

so how long does it take to process the sbr paper work? which form is it?

Click to expand...