Trashyshoots
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2019
- Messages
- 598
ATF moving the goalposts?
- Thread starter Cannibul
- Start date
- Status
Tommygunn
Member
"Those folks that can afford ...... " Okay, fair enough. But I still DO NOT want some
uhm.... goobermint goon agency (can I say that) issuing edicts regardless of what I can "afford." I'll be blunt. I do not own a real, working, full auto Thompson 1928. The avatar photograph is a dummy gun. It cannot fire one spitwad. I could put together the $$$$ to buy a real Tommygun, assuming I could find a legal papered one for sale.
That isn't going to happen because I'm NOT going to spend money like that on what might be a fun and iconic gun, but is sorta heavy and klutzy. Also, in some deep inner way the NFA offends me. Yea, I know, it's the law and isn't going away because I got my wittle poor nose all outta joint 'cause BAD UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW!!!!!
I will vote for and support representatives that will work toward defending and expanding the 2A . If the rep doesn't want to go as far as abolishing the NFA, but fights vehemently against further erosions, fine with me. One step at a time. People vote for their reps and they need persuasion. They might be ok with defending the AR-15 but "machine guns??!!? Uh, no no, that's too much I think the Ruger AR-556 I got at Academy Sports is good enough .... no one needs a submachine gun."
We need to work on that but it takes time.
No one is "getting away with" paying a $200 tax. The govt. Is getting away with sucking $200 out of our pockets and getting our names on a list to partake of our ..... "unalienable" rights.
Poper
Member
The gun haters (and some politicians) already do. And some of them believe Guam is going to capsize because there are too many US servicemen stationed there.
mcb
Member
Agreed, there would be no pistol brace to worry about if there was no silly definition of of a short barrel rifle. What is special about 16-inches?
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,206
We shouldn't be putting up with the NFA in the first place. We are supposed to be in charge.
There are no firearms that fit your description. All are eventually subject to "scrutiny", given time and precedent. There are plenty of countries to look at to see examples of this.
DerMerchant
Member
Laggy
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 130
Wafer thin slices...
Laggy
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 130
You just ruined my 1911/308/12 gauge party.
Laggy
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 130
I think the there’s a lot more people on the 2A side than you think. And I think the ranks can grow, especially on left. After Covid, and the Floyd riots, you had many people now wanting guns. Now all the law-abiding lefties suddenly saw the roadblocks to getting a gun quickly, even with the best of intentions. With things like local police and sheriff’s offices being on skeleton crews, waiting periods were unintentionally extended in some places. CCW permits are taking forever. The Honey Badger thing is a bad example to use with them. A father wanting to protect his family. His wife taking a live fire class with her new Glock 44. These people now see the problem. Of how gun laws punish the law-abiding citizenry.
We have to be willing to educate people from a perspective of property ownership and anti-authoritarianism. But gunowners on the right have to stop writing a blank check to their party, and start to concede that their party of choice is just as authoritarian as the left. Because all while the right blames the “liberals” and the “snowflakes”, they are fast asleep to the motives of their own party while their freedoms are whittled away.
It’s difficult to de-program, but in order to educate the left on 2A and what it means to them, you gotta start by admitting that D’s and R’s are one team that none of us are on.
This is part of true discourse that our leaders have zero ability to grasp, nor do they care. Civil discourse is up to us, not them.
Last edited:
Laggy
Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2020
- Messages
- 130
People will say that the Dem House is preventing it. But I think the NRA has open pockets, and the right is stuffing it with taxpayer and printed money in the name of corporate welfare. What you are seeing is the new R “business model”. Add that to every other thing they want to keep you from doing because the Bible says it’s a sin. Then go ahead and add that the D’s want to snatch your gun rights every time they hear a car backfire...add some apocalyptic Covid predictions, crazy looters and rioters, police altercations...the D’s and the R’s have tons of fuel to move their authoritarian agendas in one direction...they certainly ain’t rolling back any laws anytime soon. If you think a D or an R is gonna make the law book thinner, then your feet are not planted in reality.
I think most Americans, more than half of us in total, are pro 2A. But I also think (just one example) the NFA violates the 2A. Courts (that are indeed political and always have been) have ruled NFA does not violate 2A. Most Americans trust the courts and support laws that go against the constitution for various reasons. I don’t. And from your posts, neither do you. Thus, we are in the minority (of all Americans in total).
Yet there is a lot less willing to stand up and fight than you think.
This is not the first time they have been back and forth on braces... guarantee it wont be the last...
JeeperCreeper
Member
I agree.
I am not willing to physically fight over braces, I have too much to lose. Probably like most on here.
But I think we need to change public opinion to show these are unacceptable. Even on this forum and in gun culture, to get momentum for change.
Side thought:
I think modern gun culture has done a good job of advocating for more freedom.
I'm actually shocked by the responses on here that seem ok with the "authority of the crown" and seeming ok to bow to "big brother allows it".
I guess it's generational. Probably why my generation jokes about 3D printing auto sears and the Boogaloo while previous generations were OK with the NRA allowing AWB as long as it didn't hurt the hunting rifles.
Again, perception of public opinion. Swaying our gun culture to more "the ATF sucks, abolish the NFA" is the first step.
If we are apathetic with the ATF on braces and bump stocks, what's next?
"As long as the Crown allows me my privileges... Yeah, Tread harder, Daddy"
Last edited:
Elkins45
Member
As someone with a few stamps I think the the NFA is garbage and barrel length restrictions are stupid. However as a former government employee who had a certain amount of influence over decisions I can also tell you that you can only poke the bear so many times before the bear decides to eat you.
Calling that a brace is just smearing yourself in honey and prancing around.
Ivy Mike
Member
DerMerchant
Member
I personally have no clue why any company would produce a new design in the current climate. The "pistol brace" has been exploited to it's full extent imo. No one except q gains from it. Time to find something else instead of rehashing a basic design.
That particular brace is made by the same company that invented the pistol brace and is almost exactly like most of the rest of them.
It's not hard to adhere to regulations when you make and change them yourself.
I’d never seen that brace before and when seeing pictures of it it certainly looks like a rifle stock with a slit in it. I bet if you gave that thing to 100 people at the range, at 95 of them would shoulder the silly thing when they go to shoot it. You can try and argue that it’s just a pistol brace and was designed in such a manner but at some point in time reality will come home to roost.
The laws make no sense today but trying to argue that thing is just a pistol brace is just as ridiculous.
People say they want clear laws written in black and white, but that just leaves even more options to skirt regulations. The reasons laws have to be written in such a convoluted manner is because people will always try and push the limit. If they write a law saying you can’t put your feet over a line you’ll have people who put their toes over the line and argue toes aren’t feet. You’ll have people who put one foot over the line and argue that 1 foot is not feet and so on and so forth.
The laws make no sense today but trying to argue that thing is just a pistol brace is just as ridiculous.
People say they want clear laws written in black and white, but that just leaves even more options to skirt regulations. The reasons laws have to be written in such a convoluted manner is because people will always try and push the limit. If they write a law saying you can’t put your feet over a line you’ll have people who put their toes over the line and argue toes aren’t feet. You’ll have people who put one foot over the line and argue that 1 foot is not feet and so on and so forth.
Ivy Mike
Member
The brace looks pretty different to me. It's a whole lot more than the black plastic armband I've seen on things like the CZ Scorpion pistols.
The ATF didn't change the pistol brace regulation. A company pushed the line and got yanked back, it was bound to happen when people happily post their Youtube videos showing them using pistol arm braces as stocks.
- Status
Similar threads
