mcb
Member
I would be OK with that.
When is decision regarding braces expected by ATF?
- Thread starter Balrog
- Start date
- Status
CherokeeGunslinger
Member
illinoisburt
Member
Getting back on topic -- has anyone received a reply to their comment from the BATF?
wesmonster
Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2019
- Messages
- 383
There’s just so much about their proposal that makes no sense to me.
Why the weight criteria? Pistols don’t have em.
If you want to make the argument that no one could one hand a braced AK pistol, then why a weight minimum?
It’s obvious they’re creating arbitrary rules to focus on certain builds.
they also flat out say the Tailhook isn’t a brace, period. How’d they come to that conclusion?
And all that BS over what optic/sights it has. Heavy revolvers have been scoped for years.
The whole bumpstock thing proves that despite the judge overturning the ban, the boys in black still confiscated & destroyed a bunch. Has anyone started making more bumpstocks? And if so, how many will pay AGAIN to buy something that was previously seized?
Why the weight criteria? Pistols don’t have em.
If you want to make the argument that no one could one hand a braced AK pistol, then why a weight minimum?
It’s obvious they’re creating arbitrary rules to focus on certain builds.
they also flat out say the Tailhook isn’t a brace, period. How’d they come to that conclusion?
And all that BS over what optic/sights it has. Heavy revolvers have been scoped for years.
The whole bumpstock thing proves that despite the judge overturning the ban, the boys in black still confiscated & destroyed a bunch. Has anyone started making more bumpstocks? And if so, how many will pay AGAIN to buy something that was previously seized?
The ATF claims over 200,000 comments. I wouldn't expect a reply. It's hard enought to get them to process a Stamp.
And ^^^^, absolutely, there IS very little that makes sense about the Form 4999. I believe that is exactly the intent. Start with the '34 NFA, which never considered a firearm with a separate upper and lower. At the time the tech was a barrel pressed into a receiver, not a screwed on barrel extension then slide in and held with a nut with 30 to 85 pounds torque. It's not precise because all you do is line up the teeth to pass the gas tube. Another factor, serial numbers were not mandatory until the 68 GCA, makers did it for their own administrative reasons, and the military because of mandatory inventories - monthly - to control a highly "pilferable" inventory. "Battle loss" allowed a lot of 1911's to come home, albeit deducted from a servicemans paycheck. No longer, you will search this field, and sleep here on it, until you recover it, and you will like it!
The ATF is caught in the historical precedent they can't reverse, and further laws imposed which don't always make it better. The result is a patchwork of decisions over the years which aren't always compatible and which were made at a time when the future consequences couldn't be foreseen.
Like, the Mossberg Shockwave. Slips right thru all the "short barreled" Stamps and registrations. I was at a tool shop in Branson which at the time had just become an FFL, visitors from out of state were always astounded they couldn't buy a handgun, even a .22, but they could walk out with a legal "sawed off shotgun" few questions asked other than verifying their credit card. Inconceivable!
Things are that complicated. You can put a vertical handgrip on an AR over 26", but it's illegal on one under 26". However, you can load and transport the one under 26" concealed ready to fire, yet the over 26" is illegal (because of "road hunting" regs) and you could be cited. And both AR's may be considered a pistol, until you grip the over 26" at which point its now an AOW or something? I lose track.
In terms of the ATF already having a black eye over their inconsistent policies - at one time a carbine stock pinned to the short length WAS LEGAL for AR pistols - and their unsteady flip flopping on the Brace being shouldered, this Form 4999 should be seen as just desserts back at the public. It stirs up hate and discontent, creates confusion, and that is where the ATF wins. If you don't know what you are doing then you likely just won't try, and those who don't even check could earn a conviction and that is a win for the ATF.
We wait until January, and in the big picture, it's small potatoes compared to other subjects like massive internal corruption of our government.
And ^^^^, absolutely, there IS very little that makes sense about the Form 4999. I believe that is exactly the intent. Start with the '34 NFA, which never considered a firearm with a separate upper and lower. At the time the tech was a barrel pressed into a receiver, not a screwed on barrel extension then slide in and held with a nut with 30 to 85 pounds torque. It's not precise because all you do is line up the teeth to pass the gas tube. Another factor, serial numbers were not mandatory until the 68 GCA, makers did it for their own administrative reasons, and the military because of mandatory inventories - monthly - to control a highly "pilferable" inventory. "Battle loss" allowed a lot of 1911's to come home, albeit deducted from a servicemans paycheck. No longer, you will search this field, and sleep here on it, until you recover it, and you will like it!
The ATF is caught in the historical precedent they can't reverse, and further laws imposed which don't always make it better. The result is a patchwork of decisions over the years which aren't always compatible and which were made at a time when the future consequences couldn't be foreseen.
Like, the Mossberg Shockwave. Slips right thru all the "short barreled" Stamps and registrations. I was at a tool shop in Branson which at the time had just become an FFL, visitors from out of state were always astounded they couldn't buy a handgun, even a .22, but they could walk out with a legal "sawed off shotgun" few questions asked other than verifying their credit card. Inconceivable!
Things are that complicated. You can put a vertical handgrip on an AR over 26", but it's illegal on one under 26". However, you can load and transport the one under 26" concealed ready to fire, yet the over 26" is illegal (because of "road hunting" regs) and you could be cited. And both AR's may be considered a pistol, until you grip the over 26" at which point its now an AOW or something? I lose track.
In terms of the ATF already having a black eye over their inconsistent policies - at one time a carbine stock pinned to the short length WAS LEGAL for AR pistols - and their unsteady flip flopping on the Brace being shouldered, this Form 4999 should be seen as just desserts back at the public. It stirs up hate and discontent, creates confusion, and that is where the ATF wins. If you don't know what you are doing then you likely just won't try, and those who don't even check could earn a conviction and that is a win for the ATF.
We wait until January, and in the big picture, it's small potatoes compared to other subjects like massive internal corruption of our government.
LiveLife
Member
Anthony Miranda, an attorney in California, break down a new bill introduced into congress which seeks to prevent the ATF's new rule banning pistol braces.
https://rumble.com/v111dce-atfs-new...es-coming-soon-congress-moves-to-stop-it.html
https://rumble.com/v111dce-atfs-new...es-coming-soon-congress-moves-to-stop-it.html
lilguy
Member
We will need a new government to pass that.
What will happen to the many hundreds of braced guns in inventory, within a few miles of my home, if they become SBRs?
What will happen to the many hundreds of braced guns in inventory, within a few miles of my home, if they become SBRs?
And therein lies the problem. A FFL acquired them as pistols and ATF makes a new rule that requires them to be SBR's, you start running into a lawyers dream.
Doubtful.. everyone stood by when Trump banned bumps stocks, setting a precedent. Now Biden bans 80% "kits" changing legal definitions with a swipe of the pen. Death by a 1000 cuts.
armoredman
Member
Given the current make-up of Congress, this has less chance of passing than Bidet getting impeached. Feel good appeal to the base with zero chance of success, AND THEY KNOW IT.
Old_Grouch
Member
It's a gummint agency so I'd expect the decision will come whenever, and however it inconveniences the most people.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
