FL Congressman says ATF planning to ban pistol braces

ATF got the message with the m855 reclassification.

Trump handed bump fire stocks over. Both the brace and bump fire were both illegal at one time. I don’t agree with the law but its hard not to call a brace a stock.

Ultimately people need to voice their concerns to elects officials. Pistol braces are exceedingly common.

I think its cheaper to pay the tax stamp.

No surprise at all with all of the videos out showing guys using them as a full fledged stocks rather than as a support piece.

I never thought it would last.

Blue Brick said:

I think its cheaper to pay the tax stamp.

Click to expand...

Except I can carry a braced pistol, loaded and concealed, with a CHP. I can't do the same with a rifle. Also, I can leave the state with my pistol without having to inform the ATF first. OTOH, one could also just ditch the brace altogether, and leave a bare tube. Regardless of what the manufacturers claim, this was always an exploitation/workaround.

HB said:

I don’t agree with the law but its hard not to call a brace a stock.

Click to expand...

This. A "pistol brace" is obviously a workaround to avoid creating an SBR. If this sham is not outlawed now, it will be eventually. This will happen regardless of who's president.

The difference between pistol braces and bump stocks is that you can always legalize a brace, if its status is changed to that of a "stock," by filing a Form1 and paying the "making" tax. (That's assuming your state law allows SBRs.) You could not do this in the case of the bump stock because of the Hughes Amendment.

If you were going to Form1 a pistol with a brace, you could just as well do it with a regular stock. Therefore, braces would go the way of the Dodo.

Shameful to see gun owners calling a pistol brace a sham.

We are our own worst enemies.

I think AlexanderA has a point. Anyone who knows about guns and gun laws knows that a pistol brace is a workaround. I always have been surprised that they ever were legal. Now, there is no reason in the world for them not to be legal, but the feds have not yet asked my opinion on the matter.

So, I guess a soup can IS a stock if you put it against your shoulder.........smh.

.38 Special said:

I think AlexanderA has a point. Anyone who knows about guns and gun laws knows that a pistol brace is a workaround. I always have been surprised that they ever were legal. Now, there is no reason in the world for them not to be legal, but the feds have not yet asked my opinion on the matter.

Click to expand...

^^^I have to agree. Most common usage of the so called "brace" is as a stock. So if a SBR needs a stamp, and a SBR is basically a handgun with a stock, why does just calling a stock on a handgun, a brace, make it legal to own without a stamp?

Now, I'm not saying I agree with the restrictions on SBRs, I'm just sayin' that a handgun with a brace, IMHO, is just a SBR.

I can always go back to using a cane tip on the end of the buffer tube. That is quite legal. They need to leave braces alone. And while we are at it, the whole SBR and barrel length needs to be changed or done away with. Especially with the popularity of 10" -14" barrels are on AR pistols. Both of my AR pistols have 10.5" barrels and are OVER 26" OAL

DukeConnor said:

Shameful to see gun owners calling a pistol brace a sham.

We are our own worst enemies

Click to expand...

You are unfortunately correct that we ARE our own worst enemy. I see too many times that one group of gun owners could care less about guns getting banned that they don't like as long as their favorite firearms are left alone.
United we stand, divided we fall.

All anyone needs to hunt is a thurty-thurty.

12Bravo20 said:

I see too many times that one group of gun owners could care less about guns getting banned that they don't like as long as their favorite firearms are left alone.

Click to expand...

Or where the restrictions are acceptable because of the executive overseeing the banning. I suspect we'd be seeing a much different set of responses if this were happening under the last presidential administration.

Folks use the braces as stocks at matches all the time. The solution is for legislation to get rid of the SBR rules. Never happen, so never mind.

It would be nice if they would change the wordings of the definitions of a rifle. Currently it is at least 26" OAL AND 16" barrel. A good start would be 26" OAL no matter what the barrel length is. I know, makes too much sense so it won't happen.

I don't own nor have ever owned an AR. Have never felt the need nor desire and have only fired 4 rounds through one. Same way with large caliber revolvers and leverguns for that matter. I don't have a practical use for an SBR, AR pistol, suppressor or sawed off shotgun either. Full auto capability? No thanks. But it's not for me to decide what other people need or should like. Most sane people would see no practical use for a 200mph motorcycle since there's no public road you can legally go that fast...I didn't expect everyone to like it.
Our rights suffer little by little, just like erosion. We can point and tell people it's not our problem since we're far from the shore...or we can realize that eventually it's going to affect us too. It's not going to stop just because the easiest part is done. And it'll be easy if too few people care. When that time comes, hopefully the people who shrugged it off because it wasn't their fight have a good memory. Because the people who already lost their rights may decide it isn't their fight...or that there's nothing left to right for.

DukeConnor said:

Shameful to see gun owners calling a pistol brace a sham.

We are our own worst enemies.

Click to expand...

NIGHTLORD40K said:

So, I guess a soup can IS a stock if you put it against your shoulder.........smh.

Click to expand...

I am not saying I agree with the law. There are many laws I disagree with. There should be no such thing as a SBR... it should just be another gun.

BUT, the most common use of a brace is to take the place of a stock.

If I have a giant bag of crack rocks, and the police pull me over... it doesn’t matter if I’m smoking it or using it as gravel for my driveway. Its still a big bag of crack rocks.

Thats why I said write your officials. Join the NRA. Take people shooting. Make it legal because it should be legal. But doesn't mean it isn’t a loophole in a stupid law.

badkarmamib said:

this was always an exploitation/workaround.

Click to expand...

As is every option to oppression. The flat taking of our rights away should be exploited, worked around, parried, countered and looked upon with disgust.

A “loophole” in the law lets us see freedom.

DukeConnor said:

Shameful to see gun owners calling a pistol brace a sham.

We are our own worst enemies.

Click to expand...

Because it is a sham. If not for the NFA nobody would use them.

Rather than pushing hard for changing the rules for SBRs, people were lazy and half-assed a workaround. Now that the lazy loophole is potentially going away, people are suddenly realizing that their half-assed solution wasn't so great.

It has nothing to do with being our own worst enemy. It had to do with people falling in love with a half-assed idea and getting bit by it.

Crosshair said:

It has nothing to do with being our own worst enemy. It had to do with people falling in love with a half-assed idea and getting bit by it.

Click to expand...

Imagine if 700,000 x $200 braces = $140000000 was used to overturn stupid gun laws.

Demi-human said:

As is every option to oppression. The flat taking of our rights away should be exploited, worked around, parried, countered and looked upon with disgust.

A “loophole” in the law lets us see freedom.

Click to expand...

No. It's something people used to cower and hide. Being lazy rather than working for acual change.

I tried to get people with braces interested in NFA guns and activisim. Every single one went the "Nah, brace is good enough". Not wanting to be on "Guberment wists" and all those excuses.

Once these people get burned we perhaps can work on doing things properly.

HB said:

Imagine if 700,000 x $200 braces = $140000000 was used to overturn stupid gun laws.

Click to expand...

Reminds me of how the US government helped along UFO nuts to thwart Soviet efforts to gather intelegence on US aircraft.

Let people get used to using braces as stocks. Then ban them because they are stocks. Then watch as gun owners perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to claim the "brace" that they've been using as a stock for years is not actually a stock. Destroying their credibility in the process.

The root problem is that SBRs shouldn't be under the NFA in the first place. Since they are, however, logical consistency requires that "braces" be treated the same as stocks. Silly workarounds like this engender contempt for the whole system of laws. The shocking and unexpected thing is that ATF approved them at all (along with bump stocks). The bump stock change of heart was inevitable (whether or not Trump ordered it), and the change on pistol braces is equally inevitable.

Crosshair said:

No. It's something people used to cower and hide. Being lazy rather than working for acual change.

I tried to get people with braces interested in NFA guns and activisim.

Click to expand...

Yeah? Well, I am interested. I am active and donate. I am also interested in not having to report every time I take my rifle to Wisconsin.
I am also interested in not having to ask the ATF, with money, if I can have a rifle with an appropriate barrel length.
That is the oppression. NFA stamp for a short gun? Why not one for a longer than normal one?

I am also interested in staying a father and not a felon. And that I am a single father, I see this particular stamp as frivolous expenditure for my needs.

Strange, none of my friends think an expensive, flimsy piece of plastic is good enough, when they have plenty of stocks laying about.

That was some nice bloviation though.

By the way, you were late to choir rehearsal, we all got here on time, Tim is first chair now...