As many point out, there are some inconsistencies in what the ATF recently released. And many take things into their own interpretation where the ATF fears to tread.
It's military and LEO doctrine to shoot a handgun with two hands - so, speculating the ATF is outlawing that is ridiculous. The ATF trains to do that, too. And saying we can't use a forward grip on the AR pistol is another issue, as the magazine well is often used, and an accessory mag well wrap with finger grooves on it isn't even mentions when discussing VFG's on pistols. You can hold an AR pistol with two hands to shoot it. Wild speculation about not being able to is just that, and does nothing to focus the issue at hand.
We are talking about having a vertical flat surface on the rear of a firearm for the purpose of holding it motionless against the shoulder. Why do we want to do that? Because it then leaves only the muzzle to wander around aimlessly directed downrange.
Look thru the sights, minimize the wandering by controlling our human errors, and we shoot well enough the barrel itself is the cause of dispersion. Take the stock off the shoulder, tho, and you introduce two more variables. Before it was just pivoting off the shoulder in a cone shaped dispersion that resembles what the barrel does. Off the shoulder it now adds the stock wandering around 360 degrees and amplifies the dispersion even more. It also causes some for and aft variation that affects the "cheek weld" view thru the sights.
That's why we see rifles shooting MOA out to 400m as an easy accomplishment, but shooting a 9mm handgun out that far and hitting a steel plate? Not so much, Jerry Miculek level effort.
It's the difference that pistols and rifles - even using the same cartridge - have in EFFECTIVE accuracy at longer ranges. We simply aren't that good with pistols, so we adopt a stock to be more accurate.
What is an AR pistol for to begin with? Is it not a PDW for short range use? Basically an SBR with no stock, right? The Mk18, XM177, and others were never meant for 400m use, 200m maximum and certainly more often less than 50 feet.
What, you can't shoot a pistol to minute of man accuracy at 50 feet? Sure. Then why do we even need a stock or brace on it? Goes to many who were thumbing their nose at the ATF and saying they were skirting the SBR application process. Were they? Stamp application wait times were reduced from 8-9 months to less than 8-9 weeks in the time period the Brace has been on the market. The ATF didn't suddenly get administratively efficient, even tho they did hire more help. They just weren't getting SBR applications.
The expressed motivation for most of those buyers was to build and possess the functional equivalent of an stocked short barrel rifle. They certainly intended to hold it against their shoulder to minimize error in aiming.
Note closely that the ATF, despite it's ambiguous wording, is leaving aside the existence of the buffer tube on the AR. Pistol owners aren't specifically addressed as being the problem, it's the brace abusers who are. If someone still wants to build an AR pistol - I've got my lower done - then this change has no effect whatsoever. Right now I'm more concerned about which kind of upper to put on it - traditional A3 or sidecharger - than whether or not I can shoulder it. With some diligent practice I should be able to hit a target stocked or not.
As for the SBR being a better solution than the pistol, not so much. SBR's are a registered firearm to one individual, or trust, with long term legal entanglements. You have to request permission in advance to transport it across state lines. State laws in your area may require it to be unloaded and cased out of reach for anti poaching enforcement. A pistol falls under CCW provisions, it can be loaded, up front, and in MO, with a CCW permit, open carried throughout the State.
Therefore, for the arguable loss of effective accuracy in a short range weapon, why would I then want to registered it with the US Government, be restricted in it's use, and not be able to transport it ready for it's intended use?
Because a lot of SBR applicants see the process as becoming members of an elite club who have a privilege they can exercise that the average citizen can't.
No, not so much. If anything, they are giving up their liberties to be taxed further and, again, the effective accuracy is arguable. Jerry Miculek can hit steel at 400m with a 9mm, therefore, what is the real issue?
Whiny posers who want to look bad and get away with it. And this is why we have Moms Against Gun groups saying "we can't tell who is a good guy, so we want them all to be banned."
Good job at selling responsible gun ownership, dudes. You bought a prosthetic adapter for one armed veterans and use it as a rifle because you won't try harder to be more accurate, and all the while basking in the admiration of your buddies who elevated you in their esteem?
You got problems and you made things worse for yourself. Too bad.
