What actually changed today that adversely affects us.

Ignition Override said:

danez71:
You seem to be about the only other person who appreciates the White House's need for any distraction - guns or not - from the growing Border Crisis.

This idea came to me many weeks ago. They need Any Distraction to "make good copy" in the press, to keep the public's tiny attention span preoccupied, and also away from the very sobering federal deficit outlook.

Click to expand...

I do.

However, I don't mean to trivialize what's being done. If the courts overturn, for example, the braces, they will use it to promote court packing.

It's serious. We better have our game on for 2022. If the scales lean any more to the self monikered democratic socialists, 2022-2024 and possibly beyond are very concerning.

Elkins45 said:

...in the lives of most gun owners. I have a braced AR lower that I put together just so I could drive around with an SBR in the trunk without filling out the forms. If braces get...

Click to expand...

If that was your suppose then you failed to the letter of the law. It's important to clarify with bright lights (bright line rule?) that a SBR is NOT a pistol or vicea versyy. I know what you meant, but in Legal, words have, well, there it is.

In any event your worst case scenario is or will be, simply remove the faux stock and carry on

Have a great day!

DoubleMag said:

If that was your suppose then you failed to the letter of the law. It's important to clarify with bright lights (bright line rule?) that a SBR is NOT a pistol or vicea versyy. I know what you meant, but in Legal, words have, well, there it is.

In any event your worst case scenario is or will be, simply remove the faux stock and carry on

Have a great day!

Click to expand...

I’m having a hard time understanding your point.

danez71 said:

I do.

However, I don't mean to trivialize what's being done. If the courts overturn, for example, the braces, they will use it to promote court packing.

It's serious. We better have our game on for 2022. If the scales lean any more to the self monikered democratic socialists, 2022-2024 and possibly beyond are very concerning.

Click to expand...

We better have our game on NOW. There's no reason why his ATF appointment should go through, which can influence what the rule will be.

This video from "the ATF" should sum up the restrictions!

Rule3 said:

This video from "the ATF" should sum up the restrictions!

Click to expand...

Best video I've seen in a while. This is the problem you run into when trying to categorize and restrict various pieces metal rather than just criminalizing actions. Using a gun to commit crimes should be penalized. Turning otherwise law abiding citizens into criminal because they put a foregrip on a pistol should not be a crime.

lilguy said:

These executive actions leave me wondering. For most of us it seems nothing changed after all the hoopla. Am I reading it correctly.

Click to expand...

Much of what the left does is more symbolism than enforceable.

This was done as a distraction. Gives the press something to write about so that they do not have to real reporting. The same with reporting on police shootings while ignoring young men being gunned down daily.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. The table is being set.

EO's work this way: the President requests the agency to work out the details, and then approves the plan. It's opaque and it seems like nothing is happening for a long time, then suddenly the new rule is published in the Federal register.

Nothing has happened YET in the sense that Biden so far has simply started the process, but don't be under any illusion that the process isn't started or that the result won't be as draconian as they can make it.

Right now agency lawyers are working out just how far they can push the envelope with a rule, and we almost certainly won't like their answer.

The best thing we can do is resist Biden's ATF director appointment. Call your reps and tell them this is the wrong guy. The agency director will have big influence on the final form this takes.

Frank Ettin said:

Not exactly. The agency publishes a proposed rule and invites public comment.

Click to expand...

Sure, and then does whatever they want. My point was the fact that Biden's EO wasn't detailed is expected--it's the way the process works--and therefore not good news.

The strongest thing we can do right now is press the Senate not to confirm an ATF director who is anti-gun. The director will have significant influence over the rule and approach that ATF takes. Whether it takes a moderate approach, or whether it becomes venomously anti-gun, will depend on who leads it.

And to clarify, Biden has nominated Chipman to lead ATF--a guy who seems to think guns are only for the police and for hunters--and we need to make sure that he is not confirmed, and some kind of compromise candidate is confirmed instead. That's what we can do about this.

Point of Order: JRB issued only EA, Executive Actions--a suggestion, and not a single Executive Order, which would be an immediate Instruction.

So, all normal, red-tape laden, procedures will remain in place.

Changes to CFR take from 18-24 months, and require a period of open Public Comment on the proposed change. Public commentary has changed several Proposed Rule Changes by ATFE in the last few years, and the Changes were retracted.

Rule3 said:

This video from "the ATF" should sum up the restrictions!

Click to expand...

Video "removed by uploader".

lilguy said:

These executive actions leave me wondering. For most of us it seems nothing changed after all the hoopla. Am I reading it correctly.

Click to expand...

That is how I read it.

I do believe that “they” will try again, to do something about braces. Let’s keep in mind that the previous attempt involved trying to sneak-in a shorter-than-required comment period. Being sneaky did not work, as there was much outcry commentary posted, and the BATFE withdrew the whole thing.

Some braces do seem, to my eye, to be much too stock-like. Personally, I like the Tailhook, of which I have the first version, as it is very much an arm brace, not at all stock-ish, and, as my right hand is not aging all that well, I want to be able to keep using it, perhaps on handguns that are not carbine-ish.

Here's the game plan:

1. Ask for recommendations
2. Appoint virulently anti-gun ATF director
3. Get draconian recommendation
4. Enact executive order

The wheel turns slowly, but it turns.

Here's the opinion of an actual lawyer, who is also an FFL and a stamp collector:

SharpDog said:

now who will be the replacement?

Click to expand...

Well, the 14 year "tradition" has been to "fleet" somebody up to be "Acting Director."
By posting a nominee, that ousts Regina Lombardo. Now, another name can be floated up as Nominee, but, history certainly suggests they will just make a "temporary" Appointment.