ATF pistol brace rule lawsuits

82LjXM1.jpg

I know, poking the bear never goes very well.
 
Update to NAGR/TGR v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-2#post-12667789

After preliminary injunction was granted for Mock v Garland following 5th Circuit's request to "reconsider", judge O'Connor granted another preliminary injunction for National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR)/National Foundation for Gun Rights (NFGR, legal branch of the National Association for Gun Rights) and Texas Gun Rights (TGR), which is the 10th lawsuit among 11 lawsuits filed against ATF pistol brace rule.

NFGR Celebrates Victory in Federal District Court Pistol Brace Case - https://www.nationalgunrights.org/r...-in-federal-district-court-pistol-brace-case/​
​
National Foundation for Gun Rights (legal branch of the National Association for Gun Rights) scored a major victory for gun rights when federal district court judge in the Northern District of Texas Judge Reed O’Connor, granted a preliminary injunction in NFGR’s lawsuit challenging the ATF’s pistol brace rule.​
​
All members of the National Association for Gun Rights and Texas Gun Rights are protected from the ATF’s pistol brace rule.​
​
“This is a major victory for the Second Amendment and a blow against the ATF’s unconstitutional legislating by bureaucratic rulemaking,” said Hannah Hill, Executive Director of the National Foundation for Gun Rights. “We want to thank Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, who represented us in this case.”​
​
The rule had reclassified pistols with stabilizing braces as short-barreled rifles, meaning that the ATF was seeking to regulate Americans by federal laws that were never intended to apply to them and their firearms.​
​
The ATF’s rule significantly expanded the definition of a rifle and imposed potential criminal liability on millions of Americans without legislative authority.​
​
“The ATF has been overstepping their authority for decades,” said Dudley Brown, president of the National Association for Gun Rights. “We have a legislature who creates our laws, we don’t need a bunch of unelected bureaucratic cowboys at the ATF hijacking Congress’s job.”​
​
​
The National Association for Gun Rights is the nation’s largest “no compromise” pro-gun organization, with 4.5 million members nationwide.​
 
Last edited:
Update for Mock v Garland (ATF pistol brace rule) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-3#post-12729149

Update for NAGR/TGR v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12733601

Ex FPC attorney discuss Mock v Garland and NAGR/TGR v ATF cases along with Forced Reset Trigger (FRT) case updates (I will post comments related to FRT on "FRT lawsuit" thread)
  • Because government is involved in the case, ATF has 60 days (instead of usual 30 days) to file an appeal which is December 3rd.
  • Normally, appeals are made within days, not months
  • Recently when a court rules against ATF, there has been immediate appeals/emergency requests made but for some reason, ATF has been quiet regarding pistol brace rule and forced reset trigger rule preliminary injunctions (PI)
  • ATF not immediately appealing the PI rulings could indicate ATF may allow these cases to go through the normal court review process
  • As discussed in detail by constitutional attorney Mark Smith, In issuing the preliminary injunction after the case was appealed to the 5th Circuit and sent back down to reconsider with Bruen mandate, judge O'Connor (5th circuit version of "saint" judge Benitez for district court 😇) agreed ATF violated the APA but went further by stating that FPC and Mock would win under Second Amendment "text and history" as pistols with braces are arms protected under the 2A - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-3#post-12729681
  • As Mark Smith pointed out, this is significant as once the "text" requirement is met (And judge O'Connor stated requirement was met), then Bruen mandate shifts the burden to the government to produce historical tradition analogue (And why judge Benitez kept asking CA to produce "best historical evidence" for Duncan/Miller cases as the burden was on the government to prove).
  • Despite the PIs, ATF recently went after a FFL regarding pistol braces who was member of both FPC and NAGR. When the FFL emailed ATF supervisor the PIs covered the pistol braces, ATF supervisor told the FFL that he was not going to follow judge O'Connor's PI rulings. ATF has also done the same for FRT preliminary injunctions against NAGR member FFL and when NAGR contacted the ATF, ATF responded that they were not aware the FFL was member of NAGR.
  • In response to ATF violating PI ruling, NAGR has filed request that judge O'Connor move for summary judgement.
  • Until we have a ruling on pistol brace rule, it is advisable for members of FPC/NAGR to have membership documentation on person when shooting with pistol braces and contact FPC/NAGR if they experience any issues with ATF.
www.youtube.com

Supreme Court 6-3 Ruling Destroys ATF Short Barreled Rifle & Pistol Brace Rule Hopes!!!

In this video I break down the what is going on with the ATF pistol brace and FRT lawsuits!Apple Pod: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/armed-scholar-pod...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
Last edited:
Update to Britto v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-pistol-brace-rule-lawsuits.920838/#post-12667777

Nationwide injunction issued! 👍

US District Court Judge Issues Nationwide Injunction Blocking Pistol Brace Ban Enforcement - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/f...ionwide-injunction-blocking-pistol-brace-ban/

Britto v. ATF, which challenges the BATFE rule under the Administrative Procedures Act, has expanded those protected from enforcement. Instead of issuing a temporary hold on enforcement against just those who sued, yesterday US District Judge Matthew Kaczmaryk put enforcement of the rule on ice nationwide.​
​
As explained in Garland, “[t]he controlling law of this case is that the Government Defendants’ promulgation of the Final Rufle ‘fails fails the logical-outgrowth test and violates the APA’ and ‘therefore must be set aside as unlawful’ under the APA. … It follows, then, that there is no injury that the Government Defendants or public-at-large could possibly suffer from if enforcement of the Final Rule were enjoined.” … Additionally, ATF admits the 10-year cost of the Rule is over one billion dollars. … And because of the Rule, certain manufacturers that obtain most of their sales from the stabilizing braces risk having to close their doors for good. ​

From the ruling - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.372602/gov.uscourts.txnd.372602.68.0.pdf
​
1. Recent Precedent​
​
This Court does not start with a blank slate ... recent case of Mock v Garland provides substantial guidance ... On appeal the Firth Circuit held that the Rule "was not logical outgrowth of the Proposed Rule" that the "monumental error was prejudicial," and that it "must be set aside as unlawful." (Page 4)​
​
... the "Fifth Circuit has already decided that the Final Rule violates the APA" (Page 6)​
​
... However, "the government may not simply posit that the regulations promotes an important interest" to justify its regulation (Bruen) ... public safety concerns must be addressed in ways that are lawful. This Rule is not.​
​
Conclusion​
​
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Motion and STAYS the Rule in its entirety.​
​
SO ORDERED​
​
November 8, 2023​
Matthew J. Kacsmaryk​
US District Judge​
 
Last edited:
LiveLife said:
Update to Britto v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-pistol-brace-rule-lawsuits.920838/#post-12667777

Nationwide injunction issued! 👍

US District Court Judge Issues Nationwide Injunction Blocking Pistol Brace Ban Enforcement - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/f...ionwide-injunction-blocking-pistol-brace-ban/

Britto v. ATF, which challenges the BATFE rule under the Administrative Procedures Act, has expanded those protected from enforcement. Instead of issuing a temporary hold on enforcement against just those who sued, yesterday US District Judge Matthew Kaczmaryk put enforcement of the rule on ice nationwide.​
​
As explained in Garland, “[t]he controlling law of this case is that the Government Defendants’ promulgation of the Final Rufle ‘fails fails the logical-outgrowth test and violates the APA’ and ‘therefore must be set aside as unlawful’ under the APA. … It follows, then, that there is no injury that the Government Defendants or public-at-large could possibly suffer from if enforcement of the Final Rule were enjoined.” … Additionally, ATF admits the 10-year cost of the Rule is over one billion dollars. … And because of the Rule, certain manufacturers that obtain most of their sales from the stabilizing braces risk having to close their doors for good. ​

From the ruling - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.372602/gov.uscourts.txnd.372602.68.0.pdf
​
1. Recent Precedent​
​
This Court does not start with a blank slate ... recent case of Mock v Garland provides substantial guidance ... On appeal the Firth Circuit held that the Rule "was not logical outgrowth of the Proposed Rule" that the "monumental error was prejudicial," and that it "must be set aside as unlawful." (Page 4)​
​
... the "Fifth Circuit has already decided that the Final Rule violates the APA" (Page 6)​
​
... However, "the government may not simply posit that the regulations promotes an important interest" to justify its regulation (Bruen) ... public safety concerns must be addressed in ways that are lawful. This Rule is not.​
​
Conclusion​
​
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Motion and STAYS the Rule in its entirety.​
​
SO ORDERED​
​
November 8, 2023​
Matthew J. Kacsmaryk​
US District Judge​
Click to expand...
So if you had to explain this outcome to an idiot, what would you say? 😆 it's temporarily blocked from enforcement until when? What's the next revolution in this process?

Also, can you imagine how many people bought memberships to FPC and NAGR? It was hopefully a huge boost in financial power for pro gun lobbying, etc... hopefully not buying anybody any new suits or vacation villas 😉
 
DustyGmt said:
So if you had to explain this outcome to an idiot, what would you say? 😆 it's temporarily blocked from enforcement until when? What's the next revolution in this process?

Also, can you imagine how many people bought memberships to FPC and NAGR? It was hopefully a huge boost in financial power for pro gun lobbying, etc... hopefully not buying anybody any new suits or vacation villas 😉
Click to expand...
It means pistol brace rule is unenforceable until it goes to court and a judge makes a decision.
 
DustyGmt said:
how many people bought memberships to FPC and NAGR? It was hopefully a huge boost in financial power for pro gun lobbying, etc... hopefully not buying anybody any new suits or vacation villas 😉
Click to expand...
Can we put a price tag on freedom and liberty?

I do not believe those against British rule or who fought in the Revolutionary War cared how much money was raised and spent to buy cannons and small arms in order to win, ultimately their freedom and liberty.

Same for WWII. A LOT of money, time and effort (Not to mention human lives) were spent to stop advancement of Nazi Germany. Had we said, "No, we don't want to spend too much money" and did not pursue the war efforts, Nazi Germany could have won and we could all be speaking German about now instead of English.

And how much money, time and effort were spent to stop slavery and to allow women to vote? And much much more money, time and effort were spent to protect modern forms of free speech so First Amendment could be maintained even though many states passed laws to ban it.

Just as you can't put a price tag on war waged for First Amendment, since the Second Amendment is not a "second class right", I do not believe we can put a price tag on our war waged for Second Amendment. Wars are not cheap and legal war is expensive. So support our legal war fighters as much as you can afford so we can win the war for Second Amendment.

And just as we had to win the war for First Amendment and modern forms of communication like email and text, we must win the war for Second Amendment and modern types of arms like magazine fed semi-auto firearms, pistol braces, etc.
 
Last edited:
Balrog said:
DustyGmt said:
So if you had to explain this outcome to an idiot, what would you say? 😆 it's temporarily blocked from enforcement until when? What's the next revolution in this process?
Click to expand...
It means pistol brace rule is unenforceable until it goes to court and a judge makes a decision.
Click to expand...
Yes.

Just like for First Amendment "war", many states passed unconstitutional laws and courts ruled with injunctions to stop states from enforcing those unconstitutional laws during trial until final ruling was made. And after Supreme Court ultimately ruled, permanent enforcement went into effect by federal/states laws.
 
LiveLife said:
Can we put a price tag on freedom and liberty?

I do not believe those against British rule or who fought in the Revolutionary War cared how much money was raised and spent to buy cannons and small arms in order to win, ultimately their freedom and liberty.

Same for WWII. A LOT of money, time and effort (Not to mention human lives) were spent to stop advancement of Nazi Germany. Had we said, "No, we don't want to spend too much money" and did not pursue the war efforts, Nazi Germany could have won and we could all be speaking German about now instead of English.

And how much money, time and effort were spent to stop slavery and to allow women to vote? And much much more money, time and effort were spent to protect modern forms of free speech so First Amendment could be maintained even though many states passed laws to ban it.

Just as you can't put a price tag on war waged for First Amendment, since the Second Amendment is not a "second class right", I do not believe we can put a price tag on our war waged for Second Amendment. Wars are not cheap and legal war is expensive. So support our legal war fighters as much as you can afford so we can win the war for Second Amendment.

And just as we had to win the war for First Amendment and modern forms of communication like email and text, we must win the war for Second Amendment and modern types of arms like magazine fed semi-auto firearms, pistol braces, etc.
Click to expand...
You do understand that what I said was in strong favor of the memberships increasing exponentially since this rule went into effect, right? Just want to clarify that in case it sounded like I thought putting tons of money into pro gun organizations that protected my interests was a bad thing.

I was an NRA member for years and always made additional donations, I'm not a member anymore but I do make contributions and have memberships to other pro gun groups. I wish every pro 2A/RKBA person would do the same, as well as taking the time to vote.

Also, when I asked what the next step in the process, I guess I meant to ask :
does this case stay in the 5th circuit or does it go to another judge or a higher court to be decided, I know that nobody can tell me what will be decided, just curious where it goes from here in a general sense and if there is a clock on the injunction, I don't have very in depth knowledge on how much more procedural action will take place and how many courts it will take to get definitives.
 
DustyGmt said:
I meant to ask: does this case stay in the 5th circuit or does it go to another judge or a higher court to be decided, I know that nobody can tell me what will be decided, just curious where it goes from here in a general sense and if there is a clock on the injunction, I don't have very in depth knowledge on how much more procedural action will take place and how many courts it will take to get definitives.
Click to expand...
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just a layperson posting on THR.

5th Circuit (Unlike 9th Circuit) has been ruling pro 2A recently to cases like bump stock and 80% receiver, etc. If ATF appeals the district court ruling on nationwide injunction to the 5th Circuit, we could get another pro 2A ruling that could be appealed to the Supreme Court.
 
armoredman said:
Getting the memberships to GOA and FPC? Worth every penny and I don't regret one bit of it.
Click to expand...
Regardless of what has happened to NRA, we are all in it together and "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" applies here.

So, contribute to whichever pro 2A you want to support, but please in the name of John Moses Browning, do contribute as much as you can afford as we are fighting a protracted war for Second Amendment and antis have deep pockets and rich donors.

You could be arguing with another soldier which football/basketball team might be better but when the base is under attack, that argument becomes secondary to the enemy at hand and it's "All hands on deck" time. And believe me, our antigun enemy is well organized, well funded, undivided and super focused on their agenda of taking guns away from us and they do not care whether you are a GOA member or NRA member. ;)
 
Adding to post #81 Britto v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12754567

Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) secures major 2nd Amendment victory for millions of firearm owners nationwide - https://will-law.org/will-secures-m...ry-for-millions-of-firearm-owners-nationwide/

Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) announced a significant legal victory in Britto V. ATF—a nationwide injunction protecting millions of firearm owners across America. This victory follows several preliminary injunctions on the ATF’s Pistol Brace Rule, but this is the first injunction that applies to all Americans, not just the plaintiffs in pending cases. ​
​
WILL Deputy Counsel, Dan Lennington stated, “This new federal ruling protects the 2nd Amendment Rights of millions of Americans. WILL is proud to work alongside our clients and blaze a trail against this unconstitutional federal action.”​
​
WILL filed the very first lawsuit against the ATF back in January on behalf of its clients, three military veterans. Our case argued that the ATF could not circumvent Congress and force Americans to choose between registering their firearms with the federal government or becoming criminals.​
 
Ex FPC attorney discuss Britto v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) nationwide injunction - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12754989
  • The nationwide injunction is not a final ruling rather preliminary injunction as the case proceeds
  • In issuing the preliminary injunction, district court judge referenced Mock v Garland for guidance with 5th Circuit ruling that ATF pistol brace rule is "unlawful"
  • Preliminary injunction was issued primarily based on APA violation as Final Rule failed Second Amendment test from Mock
  • Judge's summary quotes justice Thomas from Bruen ruling and totally destroys ATF Final Rule that it is not lawful and struck down the pistol brace rule in its entirety.
  • While injunction is nationwide, ATF could likely appeal to 5th Circuit and even to the Supreme Court and stay could be granted
  • ATF could also ask the case to be put on hold pending Mock ruling
  • Huge win and until a stay is granted, pistol brace rule is struck down for now
www.youtube.com

Supreme Court 5-4 Emergency Order Set To Block Short Barreled Rifle & Pistol Brace Decision!!!

Huge order issued striking down the ATF pistol brace rule nationwide!🇺🇸 Support the Channel🇺🇸Join USCCA http://usccapartners.com/armedscholarJoin The Pat...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
Repost from another thread due to pertinence of discussion - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...n-the-pistol-brace-rule.924886/#post-12757078
​
Balrog said:
Any idea when this case will actually go to court and we will get a final resolution?​
Click to expand...
We have been following the pistol brace lawsuits since February of this year - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-pistol-brace-rule-lawsuits.920838/​
​
These are recent updates for Mock v Garland and NAGR/TGR v ATF which received preliminary injunctions for their members - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12745806​
​
SAF v ATF, TX/GOA v ATF, Watterson v ATF and other lawsuits were granted preliminary injunction for plaintiffs referencing Mock preliminary injunction which was appealed to the 5th Circuit which agreed with district court ruling for preliminary injunction for plaintiffs/members - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-2#post-12667785​
​
And Britto v ATF at district court was just granted nationwide injunction - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12754567​
​
At last count, there are 10 lawsuits filed against ATF pistol brace rule with most of cases at district court level with preliminary injunctions issued referencing Mock case - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/17-states-join-goa-gof-and-sue-atf’s-new-firearms-rule-on-80-percent-kits.908730/page-3#post-12647256​
​
There has been Congressional effort to reverse ATF pistol brace rule with hearings already held with ATF director to clarify who decides what constitutes a SBR - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-2#post-12667792​
​
The Supreme Court has affirmed that only Congress carries the authority to define what conduct does or does not carry criminal penalties. While an agency may at times issue interpretations of unclear laws that Congress has passed, Congress clearly defined what constitutes a short-barreled rifle – that definition does not include a stabilizing brace attached to a pistol 👍​
​
Mock v Garland is the most advanced case with preliminary injunction appealed to the 5th Circuit already which was ruled in favor of FPC with granting of preliminary injunction on 10/2/23 - https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...ion_for_Preliminary_Injunction.pdf?1696319429​
​
CONCLUSION The Court holds that each Plaintiff has demonstrated entitlement to preliminary injunctive relief against the Government Defendants’ enforcement of the Final Rule that the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit determined to be invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act. For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 👍​
​
With Mock, Britto and other cases pointing clearly to ATF violation of the APA (Including the 5th Circuit) with no Bruen mandated analogue to comply with "Text and history ... tradition" burden that shifted to the government, and Congress yelling at ATF that authority to expand the definition of SBR to include braced pistols was not authorized, it doesn't look good for pistol brace rule as anticipation is one by one, courts will rule against ATF in violating APA and Second Amendment with 5th Circuit likely ruling the same on appeals.​
 
Last edited:
Although we naturally want to do our little "ding dong the witch is dead" dance, this is not a final ruling on the merits of the case. This is an opinion of a district court granting injunctive relief in that district, which is likely to be upheld on appeal to the 5th circuit. It is not controlling precedent for other courts considering similar issues. Only when the USSC has issued a favorable ruling on the merits will the status of pistol braces be settled, and that will be subject to subsequent legislation and courts that do not feel constrained to follow binding precedent.
 
Ex FPC attorney discuss what may happen to Britto v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) nationwide injunction moving forward - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12755387
  • District court referenced 5th Circuit ruling in support of Mock preliminary injunction in granting nationwide preliminary injunction
  • Britto case will be tied to Mock and other pistol brace cases filed in Texas district court and 5th Circuit
  • When district court for Mock denied preliminary injunction and was appealed, 5th Circuit reversed district court ruling based on APA violation (ATF exceeded authority) and remanded the case back down where district court granted preliminary injunction
  • Following on the heels of Mock case, district court for Britto case granted nationwide injunction based on same APA violation
  • If ATF chooses to appeal the Britto preliminary injunction to 5th Circuit, odds are not in ATF's favor because 5th Circuit just ruled ATF violated APA for Mock case and any additional request for stay would likely be denied by 5th Circuit
  • ATF could approach the Supreme Court for an emergency stay as the Supreme Court recently issued 5-4 decision to grant the stay for VanDerStok v Garland (ATF frame or receiver rule); however, VanDerStok stay request was for summary judgement while Mock/Britto are for preliminary injunction
  • For Mock, it appears ATF is not looking to appeal the 5th Circuit remanded district court preliminary injunction and proceeding with the case towards summary judgement
  • Since in NAGR/TGR v ATF (ATF pistol brace rule) ATF chose not to appeal the preliminary injunction to 5th Circuit rather hold out for Mock ruling, ATF may choose to not appeal Britto nationwide injunction - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12745806
  • ATF could also ask Britto case to be put on hold for Mock ruling due to Britto relying heavily on Mock
  • Similar to what happened in "Freedom Week" when district judge Benitez ruled against CA magazine ban, for a week many "legally" purchased/obtained banned magazines and these were "legally" allowed to be kept even though summary judgement was stayed week later (CA is currently not enforcing possession of larger than 10 round capacity magazines) and under Britto nationwide injunction, pistol braces could be "legally" purchased/obtained and same argument could be made to allow possession/use of pistol braces.
www.youtube.com

Permanent Nationwide Block of ATF Short Barreled Rifle & Pistol Brace Rule In Motion!!!

In this video I provide an important update on the current pistol brace nationwide injunction and critical pistol brace cases!Apple Podcast: https://podcasts...
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
 
Last edited:
And just like that, pistol braces are for sale again and in stock (And I am sure vendors selling them will grow quick). 😁👍

Even the once "ATF approved" Gearhead Tailhook Mod2 - https://www.rainierarms.com/gear-head-works-tailhook-mod-2-black-blemish/

THPBM2.jpg

AR Pistol Stabilizing Braces & Buffer Tube Kits

Shop our full selection of AR-15 pistol braces and buffer tube kits for your pistol build kit, perfect for AR pistols and short-barrel rifle alternatives. We offer great sale pricing across all products and free shipping on select items. Click to get started with your build!
www.righttobear.com www.righttobear.com

AR-15 Pistol Stabilizing Braces for Sale at Joe Bob Outfitters!

AR-15 Pistol Stabilizing Braces for Sale at Joe Bob Outfitters!
www.joeboboutfitters.com


www.rainierarms.com

Pistol Braces | AR and AK Pistol Braces for Sale - Rainier Arms

Explore, compare and buy pistol braces for AK, AR, or any other pistol. Available online. High-quality accessories. Fast shipping.
www.rainierarms.com www.rainierarms.com

Braces – Maxim Defense

maximdefense.com maximdefense.com
 
Ok will someone with a law degree plainly state yes or no; does this latest injunction protect all non-prohibited Americans from arrest on the batfe pistol brace rule?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LiveLife
ATF bump stock lawsuits
Replies
13
Views
2K
giggitygiggity
G
LiveLife
  • Locked
Congress demands ATF explain why pistol brace doesn't violate 2A in light of Bruen
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
5K
Odd Job
Odd Job
citizenconn
  • Locked
ATF New Pistol Brace Rule now dropping in December 2022
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
137
Views
20K
Capybara
Capybara
LiveLife
17 states join GOA/GOF and sue ATF’s new firearms rule on 80 percent/kits
2 3 4 5
Replies
116
Views
10K
LiveLife
LiveLife
Pat Riot
  • Locked
ATF Rule on Braces Published Jan 31, 2023
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
125
Views
5K
rust collector
R
Back
Top