|
National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#42
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#43
|
||||
|
||||
According to Heller, common use is the standard. As a government entity they should be following the law. By their own research and data there are millions of braces out there in circulation. so they cant be outlawed.
Also, without grandfathering in, Californians are essential being forced to lose/ or have taken thier property by the government. We are not able to NFA the item. So grandfathering is the only option since they are not offering compensation (at $236 a pop - their accounting). This really seems like more of a marketing scheme as they are losing tax stamp money. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Well.... changing the rule is what makes it fall into the NFA, which necessitates the tax.
|
#46
|
||||
|
||||
Public comments can now be submitted at https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...s#open-comment or at https://www.regulations.gov/commento...2021-0002-0001
|
#47
|
||||
|
||||
ATF proposed rules on braces - June 7/2021
Can someone pin the GOA’s analysis and talking points to the top of this thread so everyone can find them? Remember, that patriots sent the Declaration of Independence to a king knowing it was potentially a death sentence, so the least we can do is submit a public comment to the ATF. Just be professional and know that MSM can probably FOIA your comment and release it publicly. We need to show the ATF that these are items in common use for lawful purposes and should not be NFA’d.
Here is the GOA comment language: https://www.gunowners.org/comment-on...pistol-braces/ Last edited by Bete Noire; 06-10-2021 at 10:21 AM.. |
#48
|
||||
|
||||
They are reverse engineering us into felons with this nonsensical points worksheet. And the big question is, what's next - where does it end?
If this rule is published, I hope our gun rights groups file for emergency injunction. Hopefully they are already working on it in case we need it. |
#49
|
||||
|
||||
The page is no longer there.. ? me thinks shenanigans are afoot..
__________________
Quote:
Subscribe to my YouTube channel ---->http://www.youtube.com/user/2A4USA |
#50
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So, in essence, we have: - ~20,000,000 new unregistered SBRs (plus the registered ones) - No increase in crime - No real distinctions between regular, common rifles and these new SBRs = In common use for lawful purposes = potential disaster for the AFT (& NFA) in court, preferably in front of someone like Judge Benitez But, the hand with the turd in it is filling up faster than the one with my wishes. ETA: Link to letter from TX AG to DOJ & ATF sent yesterday. He cites the congressional study that came up with the 10-40 million number. https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov...very&utm_term= Last edited by selfshrevident; 06-10-2021 at 12:27 PM.. |
#51
|
||||
|
||||
Here's some good instruction from the FPC regarding how one should submit comments to the ATF.
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/save-the-braces |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Question in the FPC site: Quote:
Quote:
Fed Register comment site: Quote:
Last edited by walmart_ar15; 06-11-2021 at 7:09 AM.. Reason: found the answer |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Banning pistol braces, adding fins to the back of a pistol grip, making it hard to take the magazine out of a gun... all akin to filling in the holes on everyone's steering wheels "to prevent dangerous drunk drivers from killing innocent people." When you ask, "Well how do I drive to work?" the response will be, "Shut up, racist!"
|
#55
|
||||
|
||||
Smh at all the brace owners who thought the SBR loophole (and yes, you all knowingly bought these as a work around the law) would never be addressed.
__________________
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." ----Sen. Barry Goldwater Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ----Benjamin Franklin NRA life member CRPA member |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Never needed a brace for the SBR workaround... Phase 5 pistol tube with padding for a good check weld worked for me until I was able to leave CA and get tax stamps.
__________________
Quote:
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I dunno, I guess we should just comply with the whims of our masters and Franklin Armory should give up ways of making ARs and other arms enjoyable in California. We should submit to our chains.
__________________
|
#59
|
||||
|
||||
__________________
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." ----Sen. Barry Goldwater Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ----Benjamin Franklin NRA life member CRPA member |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Loophole this, loophole that, question is letter of the law, and why law abiding gun owners should have to submit themselves with nfa, When in reality you want your cake, but can't accept that other may eat something diffrent. Should we call featureless a loophole, or even mag latches loopholes, yet alone bullet buttons loopholes. I call it all unconstitutional. Choosing to change the rules set out prior to set and match is tyranny. Besides who's side are you on anyways? The nfa should not exist.
Last edited by slicksetter; 06-14-2021 at 6:46 PM.. |
#61
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So if this goes into effect, what are your thoughts on a fee waiver and expedited processing of the application? PA sent me an email that the one I want is back in stock. |
#62
|
||||
|
||||
I have no idea... never had an interest in an SBR for several reasons.
__________________
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue." ----Sen. Barry Goldwater Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." ----Benjamin Franklin NRA life member CRPA member |
#63
|
||||
|
||||
Is one of those reasons that you have never shot one? If so, if you ever get to the CDA area of Idaho, send me a message and we can go shooting.
|
#64
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
It sounds like you and I probably have similar thoughts about SBRs but I condemn your statement beginning with “Smh at all the. . .” It is harmful to the 2A movement and all gun owners. Gun owners who claim to be 2A advocates should stand together and support one another, not antagonize certain subsets of our group just because one doesn’t personally enjoy shooting/owning a particular type of firearm. ”Shall not be infringed” is not something we can afford to be selectively supportive of. Let’s change the nouns and see how your statement sounds: Quote:
You are a respected and prolific member of our community. Be supportive. I own neither a braced pistol nor a PMF but I’ll be sending in my strong criticism of both ATF 2021R-08 and ATF 2021R-05. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Can anyone speak to the repercussions of this passing for those in CA where presumably no one will be able to work through NFA processes to register as an SBR?
Or will the person just need to remove the brace completely, in which case the pistol will not fall under this worksheet so they'd have a bare buffer tube? If they do that can they still have accessories like a red dot or hand stop? I have been considering purchasing an AR Pistol and have watched basically every video on this new rule and cannot understand the majority of it(which is obviously the problem). Should I hold off on this purchase until some of this becomes more clear? Strong first post, I know, thanks for the help! Last edited by JoeMan; 06-18-2021 at 11:50 AM.. |
#70
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Yes. The issue is whether a braced pistol is a “short-barreled rifle.” This rule would cover bolt-actions, lever-actions, etc., not just semiautomatics. The feds aren’t even thinking about a state’s “assault weapons” laws which are usually about semiautomatics. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
I looked through the proposal, things that stood out to me:
1. The "justification" appears to be TWO incidents involving braced pistols (out of MILLIONS of so equipped AR based pistols....). Hardly a "trend", emergency, or indication of the descibed weapons being unusually dangerous. 2. Aside from the silly points evaluation system, a weapon could be "OK" as presented to the AFT for evaluation, and a purchaser could purchase in that configuration, make ONE minor change and become in violation. Instant criminalization based on "bolt on" parts that are standard features (like sights) on virtually all guns. Makes the crazy CA gun laws almost seem easy to interpret! 3. While the argument that the braced pistol is too "assaulty" sounds remotely plausible <cough, cough>, the very design makes a braced pistol a better DEFENSIVE weapon in many ways for typical "home defense" - shorter length makes it more maneuverable in typical house hallways etc., slightly lower muzzle velocity (shorter barrel) makes it better *at least in theory* for preventing overpenetration... the ability to shoot single handed is good if one is trying to call 911 or protect family members/children who may need assistance to get away from the threat. A smaller, lighter weapon may be easier for weaker family members to use in a home defense event. 4. The argument seems to be that a "brace" that might also be used in a pinch as a "stock" will improve the accuracy. Unless the AFT is in charge of "Stormtrooper arms procurement", accuracy is perhaps the MOST crucial component in a defensive shooting scenario, both to protect innocent bystanders, and to limit the number of shots required to end the threat. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
SECTION I - PREREQUISITES
1. The weapon must weigh at least 64 ounces. 2. The weapon must have an overall length between 12 and 26 inches. Weapon must meet both Prerequisites in order to proceed to Section II. My AR Pistol is over 26" does this mean it's an automatic SBR? |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
My only issue is interpreting the Presence of Rifle-type Back-up / Flip-up Sights / Or no sights. If the rear sight is fixed, does it count as a point? |
#74
|
||||
|
||||
Sadly laughing at people worried about ATF change on braces, when most people here aren't even
thinking of the separate California consequences [unless they've NFA AOW'd their pistol first before acquiring/installing 'brace' - note the quotes.]
__________________
Bill Wiese San Jose, CA CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member
No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Does California even define a “stock” anywhere in the penal code? If no, then wouldn’t the federal definition apply? |
#76
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
State/local can define what's not defined and is "serving as...." Judge, DA, crime lab "expert" can say it's a stock shoulderable, style, form-factor, appearance, etc. - esp with them looking like stocks, and with all sortsa YouTube videos talking about "my California SBR", borderline compliance issues, etc. This is NOT something like the old BulletButton where there was a clear avoidance of a regulatory definition (or statutory definition). California has separate SBR laws from Fed law. The Fed exemptive paperwork doesn't apply to state law - and the concerns/ issues discussed can actually add support to a prosecution. [Somehow, someway someone might have some chance at appeal after paying $60K. It's not a hill worth dying on esp w NFA AOW exemption.] If you have a 'brace' on a CA pistol - regardless of Fed exemptions - you really should:
This exploits the NFA AOW exemption to CA's own SBR law; it allows a gun to be a Federal non-SBR (so far...) and exempt it from CA's own separate SBR laws. This AOW exemption is the same one that allows people to acquire Serbu SuperShorty, Safety Harbor KSG12, etc. 12 gauge "non-shotguns" [under 26"/under 18" barrel; note that AOWs need to be built on virgin (stockless) receivers never having been on a true long gun.]
__________________
Bill Wiese San Jose, CA CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member
No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer. Last edited by bwiese; 04-03-2022 at 12:10 PM.. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
I don’t know if this would even be worth it at this point. Sure you could register it as an AOW, but in a short time, federally they may say it’s an SBR anyways, and there’s no way to register that here.
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|