Stabilizing brace is now an NFA item. Rule went into effect 1/31/23.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politi...gun-safety-rcna65765

https://www.govinfo.gov/conten...1/pdf/2023-01001.pdf

Executive Power has been out of control for decades.

Hence, why ANY Republican POTUS is superior to one branded (D).

It was. Republican Administration with support of a R President (Trump) that used rule making to ban braces.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
It was. Republican Administration with support of a R President (Trump) that used rule making to ban braces.

Agreed! That was one of Trump’s faults for sure! He was way too liberal in his thinking on guns for sure. But, he was still more conservative than Biden.

Further, it is general trend over time that loses us liberty over time. Quit worrying so much about the individuals they are here for blips of time.

This action is more restrained, more conservative than President Trump’s action in the same issue.

Are you trying to make Biden pro-gun/pro-Second Amendment now? More wishful thinking — to promote your narrative???

Read my lips…It is trend over time and the parties as a whole that matter. These individual personalities make little difference in the long-run. They serve only to stir up short-term controversy.

it was BATFE under Obama that approved Sig's Brace-

I noted then-
it was a plan to entrap and register at a future date

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Are you trying to make Biden pro-gun/pro-Second Amendment now? More wishful thinking — to promote your narrative???

Read my lips…It is trend over time and the parties as a whole that matter. These
individual personalities make little difference in the long-run. They serve only to stir up short-term controversy.

No, I am stating facts that you cannot dispute about this specific issue.

Congress could pass a law excluding brace pistols. They won’t.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:


Are you trying to make Biden pro-gun/pro-Second Amendment now? More wishful thinking — to promote your narrative???

Read my lips…It is trend over time and the parties as a whole that matter. These
individual personalities make little difference in the long-run. They serve only to stir up short-term controversy.

No, I am stating facts that you cannot dispute about this specific issue.

Congress could pass a law excluding brace pistols. They won’t.

The fact is minor and doesn’t surpass the general trend — the bigger picture.

Play Chess and not checkers.

The facts are the truth.
The rest is opinion.

Congress could stop it in a week. They won’t.

Congress and the president could stop it if they agreed.

The house could pass a bill.

The democrats run the senate…. Do you see this getting through them in a week?

Do you have the slightest thought Biden would not veto it if somehow it passed?

Do you have the slightest belief that a clean bill would come out of committee?

Personally, while I can see the use of the braces as intended, I also agree that many got them as a way around the SBR registry. I’m of two kinds on it.

That is the point. Congress does not agree and will not touch the issue.

The BATFE have regulatory power subject to review by the Courts.

The Courts will decide if the regulation has first been issued correctly (ie notice and comment and publishing); second, whether the Agency has the authority to issue the regulation under the Enabling Statute, and third, does the regulation survive Chevron Deference so as not the be arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.

The question will have to be resolved what is actually being regulated here being the Fundamental Right to keep firearms or the BATFE authority through regulation to class firearms under the Enabling Statutes. Frankly, from a practitioner standpoint that is the more interesting analysis. A Court could determine that Strict Scrutiny does not apply because the Right is not in question, but the regulatory action. That difference ( Chevron) starts out with the legal assumption the action is reasonable (ie permissible). Other Courts could go the other way, or blend the analysis. The Supreme Court may use this as a tool to kill Chevron since it touches a Fundamental Right protected by the Fed Government.

It is very interesting.

The fact Congress will do nothing speaks to the political divisions in this country over the right. The same division some of you wanted the right to an abortion returned to the states.

Here is how I would handle braces. Purchasing or transferring a brace would have to require a medical certification that the brace is necessary to fire the firearm safely (like we used to have here in KY to use crossbows during bow season), and the act of mounting/shouldering the brace to the shoulder would be illegal.

I think you could get that bill through Congress.

As a work around SBR registry it is a stupid attempt that has caused no good, but harm.

Who had Control of the House, a Filibuster Proof Senate, and President Trump in the White House to pass a bill exempting Brace Pistols from the NFA registry and requirements.

Dr. Easter’s saviors of the Republic, Republicans. Republicans who did nothing just like they did nothing with the border.

It is time to stop electing folks who just complain for money and votes who never offer legislative fixes.

About as logical as regulating silencers.

Grizz

5th Circuit just invoked a partial injunction.

https://apnews.com/article/gun...33894e2760e16446ca0a

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-...f-pistol-brace-rule/

congress doesn't just pass laws.

Gun laws are stupid everywhere and usually made by people who have no understanding of them. If I take a hack saw to my bird gun and cut the barrel to less than 18 in., I'm committing a crime, but if I buy the identical gun that comes from the manufacturer with a 12 in. barrel, that's legal, long as its over 26 in. over all.

Grizz

What mass shooting was a brace used in????

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Congress and the president could stop it if they agreed.

The house could pass a bill.

The democrats run the senate…. Do you see this getting through them in a week?

Do you have the slightest thought Biden would not veto it if somehow it passed?

Do you have the slightest belief that a clean bill would come out of committee?

Personally, while I can see the use of the braces as intended, I also agree that many got them as a way around the SBR registry. I’m of two kinds on it.

It was totally a way to get around the SBR registry. And, that is a good thing because the SBR registry is stupid.

Interesting… the SBR thing is stupid (relating to AR type rifles) but expanding the NFA or additional regulations on all semiautomatic weapons isn’t?

Personally (and I own both) the only reason for a pistol AR for me is to get around legal frameworks in hunting. Handguns are legal to hunt with, rifles are not. I can carry a pistol loaded in my car (permit) but the same permit does not allow a loaded long arm.

The only real use (as opposed to want) for an SBR is using it in confined places. Military wise, AFV’s or house clearing. While a handgun will work for that, the SBR is more effective (and the SMG even more so)… I’m not convinced of the need for citizens to do house clearing, but that’s not the question.

I do question how concealable any AR pistol really is, or for that matter an SBR. My 10.5 AR sticks out, and I’m a pretty big guy…

So while I agree that I don’t see why SBR’s are seen as being as “dangerous” as say an M2HB, I’m not really all that worked up about that law.

Question…

How many bump stocks would have been sold if we could still register under the NFA new full auto guns?

My suspicion is much fewer than we did have sold.

quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly Adams1:
About as logical as regulating silencers.

Grizz

in the UK, they even regulate MOST pellet rifles and all firearms -- but a silencer is a buy it off the shelf item