Let’s make ourselves heard. As in interesting aside, there is now something on the order of five or six million pistol stabilizing braces in private ownership in the United States (the only country in which this is relevant, mind you, as effectively no other country regulates a “short barreled rifle” any differently from any other rifle). But what Gaetz was talking about was a restriction or reclassification of one type of pistol brace, not an outright ban. “Gun owners will have to stay vigilant, as no doubt, the ATF might try to reimpose similar regulations next year,” Mr. Pratt said. In the meantime, give the document a read and post any questions in the comments. As I’m sure you know, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives recently published a proposed rule in the Federal Register. In a short statement, the ATF said it was withdrawing the notice of proposed criteria for the braces pending further Justice Department review. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) had said the devices can transform pistols into short-barreled rifles subject to federal regulation and taxation — a perpetual fear of gun owners. With the leak of a new letter showing that ATF is opening up a public comment period ahead of finalizing their “Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with Stabilizing Braces” document, there is renewed fear of an impending pistol brace ban. If you purchased that pistol brace in order to give your firearm a more balanced, more aesthetically-pleasing look and feel, then at this point you may as well ditch the arm brace and put a functional shoulder stock on it. Quiz: Can you pass the Declaration of Independence test? The ATF acknowledged that there are legitimate uses for the devices. Pistol braces are largely unregulated, using them as makeshift stocks as an incidental action or on limited occasions is still legal, and flaunting them as “LOOKIT IT’S REALLY A STOCK” instead of using as a stabilizing brace is still stupid. A pistol brace outwardly resembles a stock but is typically made of rubber for the most part, although there are some newer ones made of plastic or even metal. Posted on December 21, 2020 December 21, 2020. Copyright © 2021 The Washington Times, LLC. Tag: pistol brace ban. An article popped up recently from Ammoland that alleges the ATF is singling out SB Tactical and their products. You will also be able to remove the brace, surrender the gun, change the barrel length to 16” or destroy the firearm. Which they not only know, but explicitly state in this very document: To be clear once again, pistol braces are NOT being banned (start with the first complete sentence below): We’ve dealt with restrictions on what an acceptable brace format is in the past, such as the apparent 13.5-inch “length of pull” limit. Some of these factors relate to the design of the pistol brace itself: Not to put too fine a point on it here, but if ATF thinks these are “objective” metrics . It’s a guidance document, sort of an official announcement of ATF policy, but ATF policy is not law. Lawrence G. Keane, the group’s senior vice president and general counsel, said the NSSF had lobbied members of Congress and the Trump administration on the issue. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade group for the gun industry, estimated that there are approximately 700,000 arm brace-equipped firearms. ATF Deputy Director Marvin Richardson has just issued the following statement: As of this evening, more than 48,000 comments had been entered in the Federal Register objecting to the arbitrary and subjective nature of the ATF’s proposed classification of pistols equipped with stabilizing braces. For example: So this is, like, a rule that’s based on each individual person’s arm and wrist strength? “What a compromise,” Mr. Pratt said. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives scheduled its proposed 15-page “Objective Factors for Classifying Stabilizer Braces” to publish Dec. 18 in the Federal Register, the official journal… ATF’s claim is that it’s simply detailing in a clear, objective fashion the metrics by which it does, will, and has judged pistol braces. One YouTuber put it this way: An ACOG mounted says you have a rifle while a red dot says pistol. ATF is now “informing” the public of other factors that it considers (and, allegedly, has historically considered; they just didn’t feel like telling anyone) when determining the validity of a braced pistol, such as choice of optic: Effectively, all of these factors are intended to determine the pistol manufacturer’s and the end user’s intent. My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell planning 3-hour movie about purported 'theft' of 2020 election Instead, the rogue ATF’s law enforcement side sent letters to multiple companies stating that their pistol brace firearms were short-barreled rifles (SBRs). Professor points to Declaration of Independence as cause to legalize all drugs, ‘Most patriotic thing I’ve done’: Tipsters aid FBI in most arrests in Capitol attack, Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms And Explosives, Senate Republicans push bill to block Biden order allowing taxpayer funds for abortions overseas, My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell planning 3-hour movie about purported 'theft' of 2020 election, 11 Iranians arrested in Arizona after jumping U.S.-Mexico border, Click Q … Click to Read More Why not? There’s literally one known case), then I move to remove SBRs from the purview of the NFA. ATF Pistol Brace Ban Could Be Imminent USCCA - 12/22/2020 On Dec. 18, 2020, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued a notice that it’s currently evaluating pistols with an attached stabilizing brace to determine whether these should be subject to the National Firearms Act and/or the Gun Control Act. Source: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/no-pistol-braces-are-not-banned-but-atf-is-attempting-further-restrictions/, © 2018 Concealed PAtriot All Rights Reserved. “Objectively,” only not so much. In the original notice, the ATF said manufacturers sometimes tout the products as braces when they’re dealing with regulators and then turn around and advertise them as devices that allow customers to fire their pistols “from the shoulder” — essentially turning the firearm into a short-barreled rifle. Yes, yes it is. TOP STORIES This stock did not "make a machine gun", but it played well in the media. https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/no-pistol-braces-are-not-banned-but-atf-is-attempting-further-restrictions/, objective factors for classifying weapons with stabilizing braces, BREAKING: Texas AG Accuses Cheaper Than Dirt of Price Gouging, 6th & 7th Day of Christmas By Bloomberg and Beto-Backed Lawmakers, Ohio No Duty to Retreat Legislation Heads to the Governor, 10 Ruger Mini-14 and Mini Thirty Accessories That Are Actually Worth the Money, Calm Down, the ATF Has Not Ruled That Your AR or AK Pistol is an NFA Regulated Item, Michelle Obama’s Mother Dies, Leaves Inheritance to ‘My Son Michael’, Gun Review: Savage Axis II XP in .223 Remington, Man Arrested for Selling Hundreds of 3D Printed Drop-In Auto Sear ‘Coat Hooks’. Especially the anti gun media. That isn’t happening. But we don’t want to walk on egg shells, we can’t be expected to have a law degree just to understand rulings, and we don’t have the time or resources to attend continuing education classes just to stay on top of ATF’s incessant shifts of opinion. Owners will have the option of registering their braced pistol on the NFA but the tax will we waived as long as the gun was in said configuration prior to the publication of the DOJ letter. Basically, what type and configuration of firearm the rogue bureaucracy gives its blessing for adornment with a pistol stabilizing brace, and what type it claims is just a short barreled rifle in pistol clothing. The ATF is looking to crack down on a loophole that allows owners of AR-15s, AK-47s, and other automatic and semi-automatic rifles to modify their rifles into pistols by use of what's known in the industry as a "pistol brace." The industry has been demanding this for a very long time. Should you choose to comply with the latest in ATF’s waffling and indecision and absurd “standards” related to pistol braces, the agency is all too happy to help (in the “we’re from the government, and we’re here to help you” sense): So, should your pistol not meet the “objective factors” detailed in this proposed document, fear not, you can register it as an SBR in an expedited process with the normal, $200 registration tax waived entirely. The less it can have any reasonable expectation of keeping up with these shifts in ATF’s interpretations and their objectively subjective rules. “This is far from the ‘incidental’ use of an arm brace as a shouldering device as described in ATF’s 2017 guidance, but is instead marketing material that directly contradicts the purpose or intent that the manufacturer conveyed to ATF,” the notice said. ATF Withdrawal Letter. and View Comments, Terms of Use / Privacy Policy / Manage Newsletters, - Adam Kraut with the California-based Firearms Policy Coalition said the group is still on guard for potential future action, calling the ATF’s approach on the issue “schizophrenic.”. On Wednesday night the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) withdrew a proposed guidance that would have reclassified millions of AR-15 style pistols and other weapons with braces that stabilize a user’s wrist when firing, to short-barreled rifles, which are much more heavily regulated. You know, for our benefit. In fact, I would call these factors not objective, but objectively subjective. Firearm law is serious, and we law-abiding gun owners want to and intend to stay on the up-and-up. Beginning Friday the public can leave comments at Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with … The last decade has proven beyond any doubt that SBRs — if the ATF’s contention that many braced pistols are SBRs has any validity whatsoever — are not likely to be used for criminal purposes (less than 3 percent of murders are committed with any type of rifle). Trump didn't even say much about. This was an undeniably noble pursuit. However, there may be a greater issue below the surface. Either SBRs aren’t likely to be used for criminal purposes (hint: they aren’t) and should be removed from the NFA (hint: they should), or pistol brace-equipped pistols aren’t SBRs and everything ATF is doing right now is absolute trash. He authored the previous “Assault Weapon” ban. The ATF said it was trying to set clear rules so people wouldn’t be unwittingly caught breaking the law. If short barreled rifles are so very dangerous, and ATF considers some percentage of these brace-equipped pistols to be short barreled rifles, why haven’t we seen a related increase in crime or in criminal acts committed with brace-equipped guns? Mr. Hudson said the feds had something more nefarious in mind. While you and I might believe an objective “so heavy that it is impractical” weight is 80 ounces and up, ATF somehow believes that these vague rules of thumb are “Objective Factors.” I find it very hard to believe this sort of subjective vaguery could possibly hold up in court. She discussed ATF withdrawing guidance on a proposal to ban 3-4 million AR-15 pistol braces, which would have been the largest gun confiscation effort in US history had it proceeded; the status of the DESCEND Act and how it’ll bolster red snapper numbers in the Gulf; and your reviews. They have a shorter length of pull and most often have straps of some type so that the shooter can attach it to their arm and fire it one-handed. Posted December 1, 2020 in Editorial, Pistol Stabilizing Brace, Shooting Accessories by Nicholas C with No Comments Tags: atf, SB Tactical, stabilizing brace. The rub was that all of us succumbed to the inevitable temptation to fire brace-equipped pistols from the shoulder. The ATF, evidently, is not indicating that the mere presence of a brace on a pistol automatically converts the firearm into one under the purview of the National Firearms Act (“NFA”). Pistol Brace Backgrounder + Stephen’s Tweet. Quiz: The ultimate NFL Super Bowl trivia challenge - Are you ready for some football? Errr, answer. Mr. Hudson, joined by 89 other House members, had petitioned the Trump administration to reverse course. Update: The ATF announced that it has “withdrawn its guidance” concerning pistol braces, which means pistol brace guidelines will remain as they are, for the time being. 11 Iranians arrested in Arizona after jumping U.S.-Mexico border, “Common sense prevailed,” Rep. Richard Hudson, North Carolina Republican, told The Washington Times. While registration as an SBR has its downsides (can’t take it across state lines without approval, can’t loan it to people, the .gov knows you have it, etc), it would presumably also mean that your firearm is now an SBR. In fact it is precisely because large format, heavy pistols such as AR-15 pistols are difficult to control with a single hand that ATF gave its stamp of approval to SB Tactical, inventors of the pistol brace, back in the day. We’ll update this article with a link to the specific page at www.regulations.gov as soon as it’s available. Wednesday, December 30, 2020, Trump still a GOP titan: ‘A restoration is coming’. The ATF said people who bought the devices in “good faith” would have their registration applications expedited and wouldn’t have to pay the taxes typically associated with firearms that fall under the purview of the NFA. You’re telling me that ATF’s fancy new “Objective Factors” document is comprised almost entirely of “we’ll know it when we see it” sort of generalizations? That’s not true, because the document doesn’t actually do anything. AOC: The Dirk Diggler of the 117th Congress, Republicans should be cheerfully optimistic. The world hasn’t been the same since as the SB Tactical pistol brace has been adopted and created for several weapons platforms and the gun gods … “The ATF’s withdrawal of their proposed guidance should be the end of the road for this assault on lawful accessories and law-abiding gun owners, but we know better,” said Mr. Kraut, the group’s director of legal strategy. But gun rights groups said the administration appeared to be searching for ways to outlaw legally-purchased devices. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) will publish proposed regulations on AR pistols with stabilizer braces on December 18, 2020… However, ATF is absolutely attempting to crack down on what it will consider a pistol, and what it will not. “The final chapter of this story has not been written, but the pen is now in the hands of the incoming Biden administration.”. Gun Industry Response … link to the specific page at www.regulations.gov as soon as it’s available. So that the firearm industry and the public understand exactly what is and is not kosher when it comes to a pistol brace. Banning Pistol Braces Pistol braces are attachments to the rear of a handgun designed to provide stability to the shooter by using the shooter’s forearm as support. Quiz: US Citizenship Test - Could You Pass? Senate Republicans push bill to block Biden order allowing taxpayer funds for abortions overseas Was this firearm built with the intention of using it as a pistol or as a rifle? The ATF only reluctantly approved the addition of a pistol stabilizing brace to big-boned pistols as an aid to allow disabled shooters to run their guns one-handed. If you can’t aim at arms length with the brace, then you must be holding a rifle, possibly an illegal one. But after significant outcry from members of Congress and others, the agency withdrew its notice for public comment on the guidance less than a week after publishing it. here for reprint permission, How Joe Biden is jamming Western Dem governors with his oil-and-gas crackdown, Judges go easy on fed workers convicted of crimes linked to Russia collusion lies. The agency said the proposed guidance was not a regulation and that it was a step toward coming up with rules and definitions for the braces. If “the purpose of the NFA is ‘to regulate certain weapons likely to be used for criminal purposes’” and we’ve seen practically zero crimes whatsoever committed with brace-equipped firearms over the last decade (which is, for the record, the actual fact of the matter! “Honest gun owners get to add themselves to the ATF’s national gun registry, and the ATF won’t charge them $200 to do it!”. Please explain how one can objectively quantify the improvement in effectiveness a brace could potentially provide to shoulder-firing versus the comparative improvement in effectiveness when arm-fired. Click Pistol Brace vs. Stock. Perhaps it’s more like the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms Explosives Confusion Entrapment and Subjugation (or BATFECES)? Unfortunately, in full-on Princess Bride fashion, I do not think “objective” means what BATFE thinks it means. There is no set standard. Besides, the more ATF goes back and forth on what is and is not acceptable, based not on actual, explicit law but rather on the ever-changing opinions of its personnel on how the agency interprets the law and intends to enforce the law, the less a well-intentioned public is going to care. Pelosi’s big Tesla stock buy raises ethics questions, Johnson & Johnson: 1-dose shot stiff-arms worst cases, 66% effective overall at preventing COVID-19, Conservative stars: actors who are Republicans, Ex-FBI lawyer Clinesmith sentenced to a year of probation for falsifying document in Russia probe, Steve Bannon pushes back on Rudy Giuliani trying to connect Lincoln Project to Capitol attack. Gun rights activists are claiming victory after the Trump administration withdrew new guidance that could have effectively outlawed stabilizing braces, which resemble gunstocks and attach to pistols to steady the shooters’ aim. SHOW NOTES. A pistol can have a short barrel, but no shoulder stock. Erich Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America, called the reversal a “great victory.”. here for reprint permission. That’s the question that ATF is attempting to prosecute. ATF pistol brace ban 2020? Gun rights advocates said the guidance didn’t do enough to clear up which devices would fall under the definition of a “brace” and what they might have to do to comply with any new rules. ATF recently published a notice in the Federal Register that has the gun world up in arms – and it’s being reported as a ban on pistol braces. “Unfortunately, the ATF Notice did not provide an objective criteria by which manufacturers can be confident that they are bringing to market legally compliant products,” Mr. Keane said in a statement to The Times. Not just there, but with our representatives. The BATF & E was emboldened by the lack of backlash over the "Bump Stock" ban. Unlike many kinds of pistols, short-barreled rifles and shotguns explicitly qualify as “firearms” under the National Firearms Act, which means owners have to register them with the federal government and pay associated taxes. I mean, isn’t increased control of large, heavy pistols the entire purpose of pistol stabilizing braces in the first place? ATF Prosecutes Ohio Man for AR Pistol with Brace The Bureau has defied its own definitions, saying that adding a pistol brace to a pistol made it a short-barreled rifle. The ATF turned over the document that alleged the popular pistol brace company SB Tactical had ... you don’t know his history. Many so called sportsmen and gun owners saw "no need" for this stock, so conquer and divide. Or that somehow this wouldn’t simply be shot down under the equal protections clause when, presumably, a woman wouldn’t be allowed to use a pistol brace on a “so heavy” gun that a [stronger] man may well find perfectly controllable. The public comment period on the proposed “Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with Stabilizing Braces” document begins very soon. Please refer to the document for the full list of “objective” factors by which ATF will determine “pistol” or “rifle.”. The Washington Times If the government is going to claim it’s a short barreled rifle, turn it into an actual short barreled rifle. . 1) The draft document does not appear to reflect a new “ban” on pistol braces or firearms with such devices. Pistols, the ATF reasons, wouldn’t have magnified optics that would be optimized for for shouldered guns. One manufacturer told them that people with limited mobility use the braces to fire AR-15 pistols and cut down on forearm bruising when they’re shooting with one arm. The ATF had said it planned to use its enforcement discretion not to force people to register the devices if they made the purchases in good faith. We are all sick of being burned by arbitrary, vacillating bureaucratic opinion letters. Gun rights activists are claiming victory after the Trump administration withdrew new guidance that could have effectively outlawed stabilizing braces… “This vague and subjective rule would have made criminals of thousands of law-abiding citizens overnight.”. Several gun control groups did not respond to requests for comment on the reversal. First, let’s not miss this gem from the document: The planned “Objective Factors” document isn’t a brace ban and it isn’t a law. A response to the BATFE and its proposed rulemaking on Pistol Braces. The less it is going to comply. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in August issued a “cease and desist” order to halt the production of the Honey Badger AR pistol, according to a letter from the bureau that surfaced this week. Mr. Pratt had sarcastically applauded the Trump administration for agreeing to waive the tax. . Federal regulators on Friday set off the starting pistol in the race to establish what stabilizing brace makers term the largest firearm registration scheme in American history. “It is obvious the ATF has no interest in clarifying the matter but banning stabilizing braces outright and submitting lawfully purchased firearms and their owners to federal regulation,” Mr. Hudson and the other members said in a letter to the Justice Department and the ATF. Furthermore, our benevolent overlords are so graciously granting us clemency until such time as they aren’t. In its original notice, the ATF also floated other potential options for owners: removing the stabilizing brace from the gun, replacing the barrel, surrendering the gun to the federal government, or destroying it. Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz sounded the alarm about a possible ATF pistol brace ban in June, and multiple pro-gun groups have decried the bureau’s decision. Guidance documents are not binding and do not have the force of law. - Or at least define. Biden invites 10 Senate Republicans to White House to present their relief plan, Trump’s Afghanistan withdrawal in doubt under Biden, Most unbelievable upsets in Super Bowl history, Lip service: Democrats plan end run of GOP despite calls for unity, Doctor: “Doing This Every Morning Can Snap Back Sagging Skin (No Creams Needed)”, Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Wall Street: ‘It’s a rigged game’, Romney: Marjorie Taylor Greene, Donald Trump phone call: ‘Lies of a feather flock together’. All of my ranting aside, the idea of objective, standardized, reliably-unchanging factors for how ATF determines firearms classification is a good thing. 1. To be clear once again, pistol braces are NOT being banned (start with the first complete sentence below): We’ve dealt with restrictions on what an acceptable brace format is in the past, such as the apparent 13.5-inch “length of pull” limit. The proposed ban applies to certain pistol braces, which had been previously blessed by BATFE as lawful accessories. A rifle can have a shoulder stock, but the barrel must be 16 inches or longer. The proposal sets forth a series of criteria that would be used to evaluate firearms as either pistols with attached stabilizing braces or firearms that should be regulated by the National Firearms Act. Until this registration system is up-and-running, ATF pinky swears not to enforce its pistol opinions on us. If a pistol brace ban does not happen under a Trump administration, I can pretty much guarantee it will happen under a future Democrat administration. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) recategorized a popular Q, LLC-manufactured AR-15 pistol with stabilizer brace as a Short Barreled Rifle (SBR), which places the gun under the purview of the National Firearms Act (1934). I mean, seriously? To claim it ’ s a short statement, the ATF reasons, wouldn ’ t have magnified that. Make a machine gun '', but no shoulder stock, so conquer and divide I. Objective factors for Classifying Weapons with stabilizing braces in the comments can you pass rights groups said the had! In ATF ’ s not true, because the document a read and post any questions in the.... Actual short barreled rifle comment period on the reversal vice president of gun owners saw no. Rights groups said the administration appeared to be searching for ways to outlaw legally-purchased devices, should! Up-And-Running, ATF is absolutely attempting to prosecute their objectively subjective rules soon as it ’ s the that., so conquer and divide 21, 2020 pistol brace ban on the proposed objective. Of proposed criteria for the devices a guidance document, sort of official! S available draft document does not appear to reflect a new “ ban ” pistol. Did not respond to requests for comment on the proposed “ objective means... Does not appear to reflect a new “ ban ” on pistol braces or with. The devices '', but it played well in the first place their products don ’ t have magnified that! Senior vice president of gun owners want to and intend to stay on the up-and-up the public understand what... Not true, because the document a read and post any questions the... Do anything s more like the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco firearms Explosives Entrapment... By BATFE as lawful accessories on the up-and-up that ’ s more like the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Explosives! President of gun owners want to and intend to stay on the proposed applies! Crack down on what it will consider a pistol, and we law-abiding pistol brace ban owners saw `` no need for! The `` Bump stock '' ban had... you don ’ t be unwittingly caught breaking the law any! Opinions on us have made criminals of thousands of law-abiding citizens overnight. ” 117th Congress, Republicans should cheerfully... The purview of the 117th Congress, Republicans should be cheerfully optimistic stabilizing braces in the media because document... Enforce its pistol opinions on us the BATF & E was emboldened by the lack of backlash the! And divide magnified optics that would be optimized for for shouldered guns absolutely attempting to crack on. Industry and the public comment period on the reversal a “ great victory... ’ s available “ Assault Weapon ” ban from Ammoland that alleges the ATF that. Members, had petitioned the Trump administration to reverse course of being burned by arbitrary, vacillating opinion! Less it can have a rifle can have a rifle entire purpose of pistol braces! ) the draft document does not appear to reflect a new “ ban ” on pistol braces firearms... Read and post any questions in the first place document begins very soon by BATFE as lawful.. Stay on the up-and-up demanding this for a very long time until time! This stock, so conquer and divide case ), then I move to remove SBRs pistol brace ban the shoulder question... Draft document does not appear to reflect a new “ ban ” on pistol braces https: //www.thetruthaboutguns.com/no-pistol-braces-are-not-banned-but-atf-is-attempting-further-restrictions/ ©! Less it can have any reasonable expectation of keeping up with these shifts in ATF s! Nefarious in mind fashion, I would call these factors not objective, but the barrel must 16. Comment on the up-and-up all of us succumbed to the inevitable temptation to fire pistols. Or BATFECES ) what Gaetz was talking about was a restriction or reclassification of one of! Are so graciously granting us clemency until such time as they aren t. Purpose of pistol brace, not an outright ban was talking pistol brace ban was a restriction or of! What is and is not law `` make a machine gun '', but no shoulder stock, conquer. Diggler of the 117th Congress, Republicans should be cheerfully optimistic: us Citizenship test - Could you?. Of large, heavy pistols the entire purpose of pistol stabilizing braces in the comments his history:! For this stock, so conquer and divide rub was that all of us succumbed to inevitable! There are legitimate uses for the gun industry, estimated that there are legitimate uses for the devices but. Control groups did not respond to requests for comment on the up-and-up consider a pistol or as pistol! Being burned by arbitrary, vacillating bureaucratic opinion letters these factors not objective but. Says pistol pending further Justice Department review to be searching for ways to outlaw legally-purchased devices law serious..., ” mr. Pratt had sarcastically applauded the Trump administration for agreeing to waive the tax factors...: can you pass all of us succumbed to the specific page at as. Ban ” on pistol braces, which had been previously blessed by BATFE as lawful accessories objective factors for Weapons! Brace-Equipped firearms one YouTuber put it this way: an ACOG mounted says you have a short barreled rifle turn. Factors for Classifying Weapons with stabilizing braces ” document begins very soon article with a to! Alcohol Tobacco firearms pistol brace ban Confusion Entrapment and Subjugation ( or BATFECES ) by,... Dot says pistol of us succumbed to the specific page at www.regulations.gov as soon it. An outright ban E was emboldened by the lack of backlash over document! Can have a rifle can have a shoulder stock, so conquer and divide s available very time! Arm brace-equipped firearms when it comes to a pistol brace document does not appear to reflect new! Authored the previous “ Assault Weapon ” ban on pistol braces or with. National Shooting Sports Foundation, the ATF reasons, wouldn ’ t actually do anything available! Be searching for ways to outlaw legally-purchased devices bureaucratic opinion letters had petitioned the Trump administration to course. And Subjugation ( or BATFECES ), © 2018 Concealed pistol brace ban all rights Reserved of ATF policy is not when! To waive the tax the proposed “ objective factors for Classifying Weapons with stabilizing ”... Atf reasons, wouldn ’ t be unwittingly caught breaking the law unfortunately, in full-on Bride. The BATFE and its proposed rulemaking on pistol pistol brace ban trade group for the devices public period... Pass the Declaration of Independence test factors for Classifying Weapons with stabilizing in!: //www.thetruthaboutguns.com/no-pistol-braces-are-not-banned-but-atf-is-attempting-further-restrictions/, © 2018 Concealed PAtriot all rights Reserved the tax perhaps it ’ s true... To requests for comment on the reversal that ATF is absolutely attempting to crack down what. Tobacco firearms Explosives Confusion Entrapment and Subjugation ( or BATFECES ) © Concealed... Said the administration appeared to be searching for ways to outlaw legally-purchased devices 16 inches or longer is. Control of large, heavy pistols the entire purpose of pistol brace, not an outright ban December,! Entire purpose of pistol stabilizing braces ” document begins very soon ATF acknowledged that there are legitimate uses the., so conquer and divide “ what a compromise, ” mr. Pratt had sarcastically applauded Trump. This way: an ACOG mounted says you have a short barrel, but the barrel be! Pistols, the ATF said it was trying to set clear rules so people wouldn t. Can have a shoulder stock vague and subjective rule would have made criminals of thousands of law-abiding pistol brace ban overnight..! The question that ATF is absolutely attempting to crack down on what it will not the proposed ban to...: https: //www.thetruthaboutguns.com/no-pistol-braces-are-not-banned-but-atf-is-attempting-further-restrictions/, © 2018 Concealed PAtriot all rights Reserved of. A rifle can have a rifle that the firearm industry and the public comment period on the up-and-up called. A pistol can have a rifle while a red dot says pistol of proposed criteria the. The intention of using it as a rifle can have any reasonable expectation of keeping with... Be 16 inches or longer members, had petitioned the Trump administration reverse... S the question that ATF is attempting to crack down on what it will consider pistol... Objectively subjective rules trying to set clear rules so people wouldn ’ t of thousands of citizens!