Calm Down, the ATF Has Not Ruled That Your AR or AK Pistol is an NFA Regulated Item

Q honey badger pistol

Jeremy S. for TTAG

If you spend time watching YouTube videos and trolling the gunosphere, you may have run across some videos and other posts announcing that the ATF has now considers any braced AR or AK pistol to be “any other weapon” and is therefore regulated under the National Firearms Act, with all of the paperwork and taxes that goes along with it.

Here’s what you need to know about these claims: THEY ARE NOT TRUE.

No such ruling or communication from the ATF has been issued.

The current hysteria apparently stems from two thing; the ATF’s recent cease and desist letter sent to Q regarding the Honey Badger pistol and an email blast sent by a lawfirm regarding AR and AK pistol imports.

There are two things to keep in mind here. First, the letter regarding the Honey Badger applies only to that one firearm. Yes, it’s possible that the ATF could expand that ruling to other similar firearms, but they have made no such move to do so…and they won’t, at least the 60-day suspension period on their letter expires in December.

Second, the communication from the Wiley law firm is speculation directed to their clients about what could happen regarding imported braced pistols. Read the full letter here.

In company-specific letters, ATF takes the position that if a submitted firearm is too long or too heavy, it fails to meet the definition of “handgun” under the Gun Control Act, as it is not “designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.” The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD) of ATF—which conducts importability evaluations—says that it is taking a subjective approach to the statute by allowing individual examiners to determine if he or she can fire the weapon with one hand without difficulty.

This approach is resulting in inconsistent determinations, of which the regulated community should take note. Within the past few months, at least one HK91 pistol-style submission as light as 8 pounds, with a barrel length of 8-3/4 inches and an overall length of 21-3/4 inches, has been determined to fall outside the definition of “handgun.” This is a change from previous determinations where firearms weighing over 8 pounds, with 20-inch barrels, and an overall length of approximately 31-1/2 inches were held by FATD to be “handguns.” Since the letters are not publicly available, it is impossible for regulated companies to know the full range of FATD’s determinations. This has serious implications for regulated businesses.

The question here deals with whether any specific firearm can meet the ATF’s “sporting purposes” test and therefore is importable.

In some of the new letters, ATF has begun listing the following “objective design features” when making its evaluations:

  • Incorporation of rifle sights;
  • Utilization of “rifle caliber ammunition” (both 5.56mm and 7.62mm have been considered as such);
  • Incorporation of “rifle-length barrel;”1
  • The “weapon’s heavy weight;”
  • Ability to accept magazines that range in capacity from 20 rounds to 100 rounds, “which will contribute to the overall weight of the firearm”; and
  • Overall length of the weapon which “creates a front-heavy imbalance when held in one hand.”

However, ATF also noted in the most recent private ruling that the above design features are “neither binding on future classifications nor is any factor individually determinative[.]” ATF explained without elaboration that “the statutory and regulatory definitions provide the appropriate standard in classifying the firearm.” ATF concluded that “a firearm that is too large, too heavy or . . . otherwise not designed to be held and fired in one hand (as demonstrated by the objective features) cannot be a handgun under the statutory definition and cannot be subject to importation criteria governing handguns.”

Again, these “standards,” such as they are, have only been communicated to individual companies regarding specific firearms. The ATF is notoriously opaque about their testing and standards for all things ballistic, sporting purposes qualifications included. As Wiley concludes,

In light of ATF’s subjective and inconsistent analysis of size and weight, it is difficult to predict how the agency will classify any given firearm under this standard.

Wiley goes on to note that the ATF says, “consideration of the objective design features of a firearm to determine the designed and/or intended use is clearly not a change in policy.”

SB Tactical pistol brace arm

Courtesy SB Tactical

Could this all be bad news? Yes, it could. The Honey Badger affair is not a good sign. The ATF issued their 60-day stay, but that was probably just a way to push the issue past the election to see which way the political winds are blowing in December. A Biden win will be bad news for all kinds of firearms, braced pistols included.

As for the Wiley email, again, it is all pure (though well-informed) speculation regarding what the ATF might do. They conclude this way:

Under ATF’s new interpretation of the handgun definition, millions of AR-15 style pistols could be considered “too large, or too heavy” to fall within ATF’s new interpretation, thereby making them unregistered NFA weapons, and subjecting manufacturers and gun owners to criminal prosecution. Given the private nature of ATF’s classification rulings, and the subjective nature of the analysis, it is extremely difficult to know for sure whether specific firearms fall within the new interpretation.

Given that uncertainty, Wiley suggests that manufacturers and importers proceed with caution regarding large outlays of cash for inventory and equipment. That’s probably reasonable advice in an uncertain regulatory climate.

The problem here, as always, is the ATF and their arbitrary, “fluid” definitions of what is and is not an NFA-regulated firearm…and what does and doesn’t fall under the nebulous “sporting purposes” definition.

The guns in question here are small enough to be concealed, but aren’t designed — according to the ATF — to be fired with one hand. Thus the ATF is apparently considering some of these firearms as non-importable AOWs.

Will this have an application for domestically produced firearms? Is the ATF getting ready for a post-election assault on braced pistols? No one knows. It’s all speculation now and Wiley is alerting its clients to the possibility of further regulatory changes…because that’s what the ATF does. It waves its regulatory wand and issues edicts — frequently conflicting with earlier rulings on the same items — whipsawing the firearms industry and gun owners.

But nothing has happened yet. Your AR or AK pistol is still legal, no matter what you’ve been reading. Will they stay that way? No one knows for sure and probably won’t until long after next Tuesday.

comments

  1. avatar Mike says:

    You’ll have to pardon us for being wary of a gov agency which makes laws based on their own whims, rather than any kind of representative legislative process.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      ^^This^^

      I scrolled down to say exactly this. Trump needs to rein in the ATF.

      1. avatar Iman Azol says:

        The same Trump who ordered the Bumpfire Stock Ban?

        Good luck with that.

        1. avatar Anton Solomyr says:

          Or those “Take the guns first, worry about due-process later” Red Flag laws he (and the NRA) supported so vehemently?

          People have gotten so stupid over the last 4 years.

        2. avatar bob says:

          To be fair, Trump didn’t order a bumpstock ban. It’s also not a ban, it just placed them on the NFA list which isn’t a ban, it’s you paying $200 to exercise a right. Anyhow
          Trump had the ATF review their decision on it and got it open to the public.

          If you’re gonna hate on somebody, hate on the real people that caused it to fail. The ones who said “I dont even own a bump stock”
          or “Those things are junk anyhow, you cant shoot accurate with it and its just gimiky”

          All those voices didn’t give a shit and didn’t speak up against the anti gun voices, If anyone is to blame its the FUDDS.

          Same for this pistol brace shit and all NFA for that matter, if the majority would speak out and cause waves all this would be over but its the “silent majority” that is the reason nothing gets fixed.

          Also yes Trump was against bump stocks at first but soon changed his view when educated about them.
          Being educated and understanding something is completely different than just swinging wildly from one side to the other like Joe does but most POTG never forgive and never forget, no matter what, they’ll hold that to the bitter end. In fact, that very sentence alone will have people comment to me saying I’m a Troll and democrat in disguise or some other bitter resentment.
          The ATF needs restricted and given strict guidelines, the NFA is unconstitutional. The ATF has become 99% Firearms and 0.5% Tobacco and 0.5% Alcohol and 0.0% Explosives.

          The government is one of the few places where you can create your own work.

          Like a shady mechanic or doctor……..

    2. avatar Montana Actual says:

      Yea… Calm down… What’s ANOTHER infringement?

      Fudd bullshit. They are ALWAYS coming for something. They cooled it because of our response and if we get complacent, again, even more than we already are, they’ll do it again and again and again.

      I’m calm, but I’m also ready and slightly pissed off after this entire year.

      Come and take them.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Kamala Harris: “If elected (‘early next year when I become president’) I will take gun owners’ permits away with executive action.”

        1. avatar Chris E Howard says:

          Good luck with that Kamahla. Here in Kansas WE don’t have Permits . So, HA HA, Suck my toe all the way to Mexico !!

        2. avatar Montana Actual says:

          Campaign slogans get more and more aggressive, but they are meaningless. I agree it’s scary af to even hear such an infringement from a candidate anywhere in government in the US, but good effin luck getting it past anything other than your words. I mean, tbf, there are those who still believe hillary was actually going to be locked up. We all wanted it, but it would never happen.

    3. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      This !

  2. avatar No one of Consequence says:

    They are not true … yet.

    As Mike says, this is a problem.

    Until there is a clearly defined set of standards, that can be easily observed, measured and verified on an objective basis, and preferably encoded in law as opposed to rules (that are more easily changed by an agency without congressional approval), everyone who owns a “rifle-caliber” pistol is at risk.

    IMHO, of course.

    1. avatar The Huscarl says:

      Well, we already kind of have that. In the initial challenge to the 1934 NFA, the Supreme Court ruled in part that weapons having utility in the service of a militia are protected by the 2nd Amendment. Then they got the other half wrong by declaring that the shotgun in question would have no utility in a militia, and therefore would not be protected.

      The military uses sbr’s. They have well documented utility in combat. They would be useful in a militia and are therfore protected.

      Imo ar/ak pistols only exist as a workaround for stupid government rules anyway. Same with bump stocks.

      1. avatar Tim U says:

        How about we all do a little trade then?

        Let’s “accept” that court precedent, and then say “everyone with one of these pistols that would be an AOW now, go add a stock between now and 60 days from now. Make it the rifle you really want. By the way, SBRs are now removed from the nfa as unconstitutional because it’s suitable for militia use”

        I’d be willing to accept that.

        1. avatar Baldwin says:

          It’s all freaking word games! We know what the 2A says.

        2. avatar The Huscarl says:

          Nah. That precedent actually sets up a legal paradox.

          The point of banning weaponry is to remove the most dangerous weapons from society in order to make society safer. However, military gear is explicitly protected. The gear is used by the military specifically because it’s the most dangerous weaponry available. So if you can’t ban military gear, why ban any weaponry at all?

        3. avatar The Huscarl says:

          I guess what I’m trying to say is that all gun laws are unconstitutional, period. The only weapons laws I would accept would be bans on CBRN (Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear) because those weapons continue doing damage even after the delivery system has become inert.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I guess what I’m trying to say is that all gun laws are unconstitutional, period. The only weapons laws I would accept would be bans on CBRN (Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear) because those weapons continue doing damage even after the delivery system has become inert.”

          Hhhmmm. The Second Amendment calls out “arms”, not guns. Not a fan of the government being the only allowable group permitted “arms”.

          CBRN are “arms”. If, big “if”(?) “a well regulated militia” is designed to keep the central committee in check, all the central committee need do is announce CBRN will be used against any insurgency; game over. Balance of terror is a good thing, the intended thing.

        5. avatar rt66paul says:

          The problem is that it is a handgun not a long gun. 2 separate animals. The only place to go is keep it a handgun or to call it a AOW. Maybe they need to state the problem, if it is the brace is too long, that could be changed to be a bit shorter or install a different one. If it is too heavy in front, rework the barrel and flash suppressor to make it lighter.
          While I don’t like it, if the whole package can be too heavy(give a weight that is ok), the pistol can be trimmed down by using smaller mags, lighter ammo and the manufacturers would know to build their pistols within the specs.

          I was always skeptical about handguns that shoot long gun ammo. Not so much .223, 5.45×39 but .308, 7.62×39 and the like are powerful rounds that few can handle with one hand.
          Even regular handgun calibers are more accurate(safe shooting?) while using both hands. These braces are great for handicapped shooters, using the brace and shooting 2 handed could be more stable also. Using the brace as a rifle stock is a workaround, we would be much better served with a rifle stock and a short barrel(especially on AR10 and AK47 platforms).

        6. avatar rt66paul says:

          Please, don’t roast me. I believe that these all should be legal. I just question how wise it is to use a firearm that is so hard to control, like rifle caliber pistols and bump stocks firing high caliber rounds.
          That is up to you and you are ultimately responsible.

        7. avatar No one of Consequence says:

          Paul: Understood, no worries at least on my part. I personally would probably not much care for a pistol in 300 Win Mag…

          But you hit the heart of the problem. The formal standards that are in place (e.g. vertical foregrips) are insufficient to bound the problem space, and the agency won’t clarify. Just how far behind the trigger, for instance, can something project? Does that change if there’s a magnifying optic put on the gun? How far from the bore centerline can something (like a brace) protrude from that extension? What’s the maximum projected area of that protrusion? Is there a weight limit? Under what conditions (loaded / unloaded, etc.)? Is there a particular region within which the balance point (loaded/unloaded) must be? If so, how is that region specified?

          The equivalent would be to tell, say, the auto industry that cars they make can’t emit too much pollution … but never giving a list of what’s regulated (e.g. CO, NOx) and what quantities are acceptable (1 part per million, 3 parts per billion, etc.). Instead, regulators will know an overly polluting vehicle when they see it.

          There’s no way such regulation would pass muster; the auto industry would scream bloody murder, and for good reason – it cannot be enforced in any kind of uniform way, and is a good way to ensure corruption, bribery, favoritism and capriciousness are the order of the day.

      2. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

        The court did not declare that the SBS had no militia use; rather, they declined to assert that it did, absent evidence. Miller managed to get himself killed before trial, so his side didn’t present any evidence in support of the SBS being a militia-suitable weapon.

        “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”

        1. avatar Serpent_Vision says:

          Correction – chose not to appear at trial, was shot to death before the decision.

      3. avatar Leigh says:

        so are machine guns and silencers…COMMONLY used items by the military…by the millions…all over the world…
        for that matter…mines and grenades, too…and armor piercing ammo

    2. avatar D Y says:

      Trump should have fired everyone in that agency when he was hired. Probably many others as well. Let them show their loyalty to the office of the President instead of the person, and in turn the American people, before they get their job back.

  3. avatar pilot25 says:

    Yes, calm down until Biden gets elected then panic. Another ridiculous article by Zimmerman.

  4. avatar Stateisevil says:

    Man, the NYC Democrat’s ATF is aggressive, who would have guessed it? The next 4 years will be tough for sure regardless of who wins this ridiculous election.

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      Maybe if Biden is elected his administration will re-approve bump stocks.

      It is a documented fact that it was the Democratic Obama/Biden administration that approved bump stocks in the first place.

      And it is a documented fact that it was Republican president Donald Trump who personally gave the order to ban bump stocks.

      And it is republican president Donald Trump’s administration that is now considering banning rifle caliber pistols with braces.

      It is a documented fact that it was the Democratic Obama/Biden administration that approved pistol braces on rifle caliber handguns.

      Now, please continue whining about your treasured delusional narrative about Obama and Biden taking your gun rights.

      1. avatar Trump voter says:

        Put down the koolaid ! You obviously have lost way too many brain cells as it is .

        1. avatar Michael Z. Williamson says:

          His statements are factual and easily documented, Kool Aid drinker.

          Let me guess your retort: “No one cares about bumpstocks, RINO!”

          Which is an odd definition of “RINO,” since is assumes real Republicans support gun control.

          And of course, the precedent to redefine things under false pretenses and have them granted Chevron deference can lead to wholesale confiscation of literally anything.

      2. avatar J. Smith says:

        Miner the whiner continuing to mine fools gold. You know who is the father of inversion Miner? Perhaps, SATAN? I’d say you fit the description, aka “shit stirrers”.

      3. avatar Michael Z. Williamson says:

        Zer0 wanted to, he just had no comprehension of how the Executive Branch worked.

        Joe did, but he’s senile. But he’ll be replaced by Harris.

        She probably has no idea, either, but Nazi Pelosi does.

        Assuming they win next week. Or “Win.”

      4. avatar Montana Actual says:

        https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/summary-president-obama-gun-proposals.aspx

        You were saying? Something about “documented facts”? Yea, thought so, asshole.

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          Mmmm, Obama’s ‘gun control proposals’, you say?

          Those were ‘proposals’ never implemented.

          The Obama/Biden administration did in fact approve both bump stocks and pistol braces for rifle caliber handguns.

          And now Republican Donald Trump’s administration has already unwound the bump stocks and is headed for pistol braces, that is a documented fact.

          I’m really surprised you don’t understand the difference between a ‘proposal‘ and an official action.

          But really, it’s par for the course for the conservatives who preach about family values, yet worship a man who has committed adultery on three different wives, paying porn stars hundreds of thousands of dollars in hush money.

      5. avatar Someone says:

        “Maybe if Biden is elected his administration will re-approve bump stocks.”
        Do you think he will do that before or after he bans everything they can possibly get attached to? There is three pages of gun control promises on Biden’s web page. You are not fooling anyone with your thin lies.
        https://youtu.be/NNmtU-oTxJE

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          “You are not fooling anyone with your thin lies.”

          You falsely accuse me of lying, but the fact is, the Obama/Biden administration approved both bump stocks and pistol braces for rifle caliber handguns.

          And now republican president Donald Trump is banning both gun accessories.

          I guess Trump was right when he told you that the things that are going on and the things you see aren’t really happening and you believed him.

          And Republican Trump also told you that we keep rounding the corner on COVID-19, ask the folks in Wisconsin about that.

          If you keep rounding the corner it means you are going in circles.

          Y’all have been snookered by a slick NYC ConMan… Again.

  5. avatar Scott C. says:

    The ATF does not care about the rule of law nor going through proper proceedings to change laws. To me this should be a clear cut case of ex post facto (I am not a lawyer, I don’t play one on tv, not did I sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night) pistols that were bought legally and then declared an AOW by any government agency via a “policy change” should be null and void.

  6. avatar Sam I Am says:

    “To me this should be a clear cut case of ex post facto…”

    One more time: Declaring something contraband as of a certain date is not an ex post facto law. The best example of ex post facto is the Nuremburg Trials. “Crimes against humanity” did not exist prior the trials. That is, regardless of the carnage, vanquished nations and their leaders were not subject to international tribunals.

    Perhaps a more contemporary example would be a law that states, “Firearms of any sort are considered contraband, and thereby illegal to possess”, upon passage of this law, and signature by the President of the United States. Additionally, the possession of any firearm of any sort prior to passage and signature of this law is also illegal, and violators will be arrested and tried for violating a Class One federal felony.”

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      slam, that’s not quite accurate.

      “The phrase ‘crimes against humanity’ was first employed internationally in a 1915 declaration by the governments of Great Britain, France and Russia which condemned the Turkish government for the alleged massacres of Armenians as “crimes against humanity and civilization for which all the members of the Turkish Government will be held responsible together with its agents implicated in the massacres”, see p. 5 of this contribution.

      back to top
      Early development
      Nuremberg Tribunal:

      Despite this early use of the term, the first prosecutions for crimes against humanity took place after the Second World War in 1945 before the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg. The charter establishing the IMT of Nuremberg defined crimes against humanity as:

      …murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or prosecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.”

      And interestingly enough, under the Nuremberg terms, every individual who took up arms to protect the institution of slavery in 1861, is guilty of crimes against humanity.

      Hang ‘em high!

  7. avatar Kevin says:

    The bottom line is – we need to get rid of all the labels. Get rid of pistol, rifle and shotgun.

    They are all firearms.

    All gun laws infringe.

    Stop the infringement!!

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      The ATF is not a Constitutional authorized agency as well,when added to the fact that all gun control laws are un Constitutional time to do away with both.

      1. avatar PMinFl says:

        Most government agencies are not described in the constitution, they were created by bureaucrats.

  8. avatar Rusty - Molon Labe - Chains says:

    Calm down my ass, as of last night:
    https://youtu.be/u87NIIvofjU
    He reffed Mac who has a live stream set for 8PM tonight:
    https://youtu.be/vHK7F3H_l3c

    I trust the ATF as far as I can toss the Washington Monument. I will be writing my Congressman and both my Senators today suggesting that the ATF should be disbanded and defunded.

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      And your selected representatives will guffaw as they carefully place your letter in the circular file.

      1. avatar Rusty - Molon Labe - Chains says:

        I guess yours end up there. I get replies that speak directly to my issue, and of course requests for more campaign contributions.

        1. avatar Michael Z. Williamson says:

          If we can offer them a lifetime supply of hookers and blow, they might actually give us what we want. It works for the Demorrhoids, after all.

          I draw the line at underage children, though.

  9. avatar sound awake says:

    the honey badger was pretty low hanging fruit if this was indeed an operation to get rid of ar pistols
    but this all could have been political theater too
    to try and separate trump from his voters
    and create division in the ranks
    by trying to make him look weak on guns in the runup to the election
    trying to separate trump from his voters
    and creating division in the ranks:
    the #1 play in the dem playbook for the last 5 years…
    im not fallin for it
    it was at least as likely as not the same sort of political hail mary play that chuck u schumer tried to throw yesterday when he said that all that traitor joe bite me would have to do to forgive everybodys student loan debt is to simply “check a box”

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      “political theater too
      to try and separate trump from his voters
      and create division in the ranks”

      You do know that the ATF is operating under a director appointed by Donald Trump, right?

      And that Donald Trump and his attorney general, have had full control of the ATF for four years now?

      Donald Trump and the Republicans own the ATF and their actions.

      I know that doesn’t quite fit into your talking point but a fact is a fact, Jack.

  10. avatar Warwolf says:

    Yawn, I’m gonna keep my stuff regardless of ANY law they pull out of their ass.

  11. avatar WARFAB says:

    ” Overall length of the weapon which “creates a front-heavy imbalance when held in one hand.” ”

    Isn’t that exactly why most braces have the velcro strap?

  12. avatar Darkman says:

    I don’t care how they rule because they are going to do whatever they think they can get away with. Then it goes to the courts and “We the People” wait with baited breath and Scream at the Interweb. Instead of dealing with the issue as Our Founding Patriots did by Lighting their “Ass’s Up”. The time is long past to Piss or get Off the Pot. Regardless of how any court rules including the Supreme Court. There will always be Politicians and Bureaucrats who will Game the System anyway possible to subjugate the citizenry and force them to relinquish their Rights and Freedoms. Unless they are removed from Society by any and all means. As was done to the British. “We the People” are facing an Enemy who has been playing the Long Game for the last 60 years in the attempt to usurp the Constitution and de-legitimize it’s meaning. Now the question must be asked. Can those who believe in the Freedoms and Liberties handed down unto Us by the Blood of the Founding Patriots and all who fought to Protect and Preserve them since. Simple stand aside and allow those who are Gaming the System to continue to whittle away all that was Fought, Bled and Died for or will they rise up in reverence to those who gave so much in order for them to live in the Freest Nation in the history of mankind. It is a simple question that requires a hard answer, but it must be answered. To do otherwise only shows compliance to those who wish to Rule. Keep Your Powder Dry…

  13. avatar M Bear says:

    I wasn’t freaking out. I no longer care what the ATF decides; I’m not registering, getting rid of, or changing shit – regardless of what they declare

  14. avatar Greg says:

    MAC is a you tube fear monger and shill. I wouldn’t trust a thing he says. Most gun tubers are total bullshit artist.

    1. avatar Someone says:

      Tim of MAC fame is well known gun rights activist. He puts his money qhere his mouth is and sues (together with GOA) Trump administration for the bump stocks fiasco.
      Who the hell is Greg?

  15. avatar Roger J says:

    This is a political attack on Trump and you are not supposed to vote for him. These are rogue ATF lawyers who are holdovers from 0bama who have violated 2 of Trumps Executive Orders than ban this activity.

    1. avatar Michael Z. Williamson says:

      Head of the agency is a Trump appointee.

      Thanks for playing.

      Certainly, Bidet would be worse. But stop deluding yourself that Trump is your friend.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        The Obama/Biden ministration approved both bump stocks and pistol braces for rifle caliber handguns.

        Republican Donald Trump‘s administration is banning both gun accessories. That’s not surprising, considering he is a New York City wealthy elitist who defecates into a gold plated commode because white porcelain is just not good enough for his high class buttocks.

        Gun Control is Winning.

  16. avatar Will Drider says:

    ATF Weaponized just like Comey’s FBI! This is a political move to create disappointment with Trump among core Republican 2A Supporters.

    ATF opinions are for shit and dont match the written text of the NFA or the GCA! Just like putting a verticle foregrip on a handgun. No Law against it, just a ATF memo and the have lost in Court on this issue of it being a AOW. Pistols with rifled barrels are SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED from being AOW per the AOW text/Law. Purely ATF intimidation and the reason the ATF “OPINION” has never been written into law since it was published in 2006.

    Why is the default conclusion a “NFA regulated firearm” just because they are long/heavy handguns? Why don’t they fall into “Firearm” like the Rem Tac14 and Mossy Shockwave?

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      “This is a political move to create disappointment with Trump among core Republican 2A Supporters.”

      Do you think that the nations top law enforcement officer, attorney general William Barr and the Trump appointed director of the ATF are doing anything except the express directions of Donald Trump?

      After four years, Donald Trump and the Republicans own the actions of the ATF.

  17. avatar RGS says:

    Trump may have appointed the head of the DOJ and ATF, but the work is done by career bureaucrats. These are the same people that Hillary and the Democrats told to resist Donald Trump’s actions and policies.
    Btw, I have a 20 gauge Model 12. I can, and have to prove I could do it, shot with one hand. I do need the second hand to chamber the next round. But if I can shoot it with one hand, under the ATF guidelines would it now be considered a pistol?

  18. avatar GomeznSA says:

    The usual litany of comments – some good, some bad and some well simply minerish.
    I’ve been thinking of the best way to approach this whole brouhaha and this is what I came up with. A Pinto (that’s an old Ford for the kids on here) was NOT ‘designed’ to be a race car but if someone wanted to they ‘could’ use it as one. Not likely to be very efficient in that role but a determined person could try.
    Kind of reminds me of the flap over ‘bump stocks’ – y’all DID weigh in on that during the public comment period, didn’t ya? Bump firing is a technique – NOT a piece of hardware. As I understand that ‘issue’ that technique was ‘invented’ back in the ’50s – with a shoestring no less. Yes, ATF needs to be reined in nd quit making unilateral decisions based on their opinions instead of reality and common sense.

    1. avatar Michael Z. Williamson says:

      We weighed in and were ignored.

      Why would the Political Class care what people think?

  19. avatar J. Smith says:

    Like anyone is using a pistol brace as a brace and not a buttstock, quit deluding yourselves, just go get a tax stamp.. Maybe, if folks weren’t constantly posting videos and pics running through a d-60 mag with the brace shouldered the whole time no one would give a crap about braces actually being misused as shoulder stocks and leave it alone. Dont call fire on your own position.

    Yep the ATF does what most regulatory bodies do, they make vague guidance that can be interpreted however they want, when they want, just like most game commissions, dont bother calling me out on that I dont care to explain, take it as fact or nod off. BTW ATF gets cash awards for busting violators, need any more motivation why not to be straight shooters?

    Just like the whole fake plandemic response, if you want what you want, like say go back to “normal”, or the NFA’s to go away, and have all weapons as weapons not sbr’s, aow’s, etc…en mass quit complying. When 10 million gun owners, and businesses and aligned politicians all flip them the bird and not comply, have fun enforcing that, it is a group act of civil disobedience, the problem is you couldnt find two people willing to hit the wire first, keep touting your molon labe crap and so forth. Just as a measure, how many of you keyboard patriots refuse to wear a mask? Crickets im sure, if you wont push back on something little like that i doubt you are ready to jump in the scrum.

    1. avatar Michael Z. Williamson says:

      Exactly this. The VA “protesters” proudly complied with an illegal order to not have guns in the protest zone, and bloviated about how awesome they were for doing so. Meanwhile, Antifags riot and burn and get attention.

      And the alleged threepers are all walking around wearing face panties like compliant bottoms.

    2. avatar Ben dover says:

      The original brace design was made by and individual for his disabled friend. Do people use braces to shoulder a weapon? absolutely. The manufacturer intend for them to be used as arm braces. There is no secret page on sb tactical showing how awesome they are at being used as stocks. Merely, the ATF is making an inference on the intent of both parties. The argument of implied intent is the same argument anti-gun lobbyists have used in the past. I’ve heard many times people say that AR’s and AK’s are intended for committing mass murder. Currently they are trying to make it legal for gun companies to be sued for crimes committed with their firearms. We all know that firearms are tools and how they are used is up to the individual. The ATF is trying to stop the “crime” of shouldering a brace before it’s even been committed.

      And sure the ATF is “just being another government agency” with its ambiguity, however, most government agencies have freely published rules and regulations along with the issuance of changes of policy to the general public instead of an individual. Changing the interpretation of a law that turns people into felons should come with a warning at the very least. Saying the ATF is just being the ATF is just saying “oh well thats the way it is” when in actuality we should be lobbying against it.

      Mass noncompliance as a means to change would never last. Most gun rights advocates are already derided in the news. Fear mongering and the media would label all those involved as violent alt right usurpers. Unfortunately thats not how we get mass acceptance or appeal to those who are undecided or unaware.

      P.S. Please, please, please do not conflate not wearing a mask with a patriotic endeavor. And just so you know referring to the pandemic as the “plandemic” makes you seem like a conspiracy pandering nut job. It’s real, people are dying. Masks cost no personal freedom aside from slight inconvenience and could possibly save someones life. As my grandmother would say, you should be considerate of others. You seem like a tough guy, not tough enough to wear a mask?

  20. avatar BeoBear says:

    They aren’t coming for your ar/an pistols……….yet. One of the first things that will come out of a Biden lead government will be loosening up the reins of the ATF instead of tightening them. Then will immediately come the ban of AR/AK pistols as they are already setting it up. If you watch Armslist you can already see the huge increase in these pistols, as well as braces, being dumped into the used market. It’s a gamble of course because if Trump wins your pistol stays legal. Maybe. We can’t just forget the Judas move that Trump pulled on that. Also look at Trump saying he doesn’t like silencers when asked about them in a public meeting. He’s not the stalwart 2A defender he portrays but he is the best of the two. As put best by South Park during the first election it comes down to “a giant douche or a turd sandwich”. This election comes down to the same thing and nobody wants to take a bite of a turd sandwich.

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      “if Trump wins your pistol stays legal“

      Ummm, you know, it’s the Trump administration that is taking the action to ban pistol braces on rifle caliber handguns, did you read the article.

      If you re-elect trump, his administration will continue their efforts to roll back Obama/Biden’s express approval of pistol braces on rifle caliber handguns.

      Just as Donald Trump’s administration did in banning bump stocks.

      1. avatar Someone says:

        “If you re-elect trump, his administration will continue their efforts to roll back Obama/Biden’s express approval of pistol braces on rifle caliber handguns.”

        And if you don’t, braces will be the least of your problems, since Biden and his friend Francis O’Rourke will turn all semi autos and normal capacity magazines into NFA items.

      2. avatar BeoBear says:

        If Trump wins there is always a chance he won’t do anything to stop the ATF, he flopped on the bump stock (as I said in my first comment). If Trump loses it won’t matter because Biden is going to do it for sure. Understand the difference? At this point, anyone who is capable of understanding the ramifications of this election and still votes Democrat is an enemy to the constitution and by default, of America. Ignorance of what is at stake is not an excuse in most cases. Trying to justify a democratic administration is foolish and unAmerican.

  21. avatar Alan says:

    The antics, past, present and future of the ATF/BATFE regarding firearms are, have been and will likely remain problematic until those occupying policy making chairs at that agency get squared away, which is to say until the anti gun types who inhabit and run the agency are finally removed from policy setting and operational level positions.

    Additionally, The Congress, aka House of Representatives and U.S. Senate have to show some real willingness to exercise control over the firearms related operations/antics of the agency. Unfortunately, as I see it, correct me should I be in error, neither The House nor The Senate have shown any real inclination toward such necessary action.

  22. avatar Dale says:

    Dan, apparently you are retarded. If you can’t look at the new potential guidelines ATF has allegedly provided, and see how they will be used to shut down braces, you’re a moron. Without rehashing ATF’s recent history of “secret” opinion letters, and arbitrarily making shit up (which you should be familiar with), it’s an easy and logical assumption that they are absolutely coming after braces.

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      “they are absolutely coming after braces.”

      If Donald Trump is reelected his administration will continue their push to ban pistol braces on rifle caliber handguns, just as they did bump stocks.

      Trump Gun Control is Winning.

      1. avatar Obama Trump Voter says:

        Just use this article as an example to the benefits of running adblockers. You can read moronic ideas without supporting the moronic posters…

  23. avatar FedUp says:

    I don’t know why you posted an article minimizing this, when we should be fighting it before it becomes ‘formal and fixed’.

    People in the industry are getting cease and desist letters from criminal enforcement division, and the agency is violating Trump’s Executive Order in doing it.

      1. avatar Obama Trump Voter says:

        Shut up! We’ll get some clicks on our posts bitching about the rule changes after it becomes “official”…

  24. avatar Jim Bob says:

    So if I fire my “handgun” with two hands, like everyone who’s name isn’t Rick Grimes, then does my Glock cease to be a “handgun”?

    I guess legislators in the ’30s got all their firearm knowledge from Hollywood even back then.

    1. avatar Ben dover says:

      “As we have seen countless videos of people firing their pistols with two hands, and manufactures including grip cuts and gas pedals to help facilitate this, we at the ATF have decided that all pistols will now be considered AOW’s” – The ATF after seeing this comment probably

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “So if I fire my “handgun” with two hands, like everyone who’s name isn’t Rick Grimes, then does my Glock cease to be a “handgun”?”

      Does your GLOCK have a capability to accept a high capacity magazine? Does your GLOCK have a pistol grip extending below the receiver? Does your GLOCK have a device covering the barrel so you don’t get burned when shooting fast? Does your GLOCK have a threaded barrel? If your GLOCK has one or more of these features, it is no longer a handgun, but an assault weapon.

  25. avatar CharlieB says:

    “Calm down” title = the equivalent of the “this is fine” burning house meme.

  26. avatar Jb says:

    Congress wont touch the ATF for the same reason they wont reign in the courts. They are cowards unworthy of the oath they took.

    Shouldnt an agency of the federal government be working to follow and obey the 2nd Amendment and not working to deny citizens use of it. All of it. Taxation of a right the government has no authority to regulate should not be lawful. The text of the 2nd Amendment is plain and simple.

  27. avatar James bond says:

    I like how it states they will evaluate on the ability to accept 20-100 round magazines. Double stack guns are now SBRs, especially all glocks with those 33rd mags.

  28. avatar John Brace says:

    So I read the letter and it mentions rifle caliber ammo. So does this mean AR-9 pistols are excluded from this? Logic would tell you given they shoot handgun ammo, it would be acceptable and not require registration.. But I’m confused

  29. avatar A Real Liberal says:

    Yikes, I used to disable my adblocker on this site to offer them revenue but thankfully turned it back on. “It wont happen” until it’s too late but fortunately we’ll get clicks bitching about something after it happens. I guess that’s what happens with a fair weather person who rode the coattails of “The Truth About Cars”…

  30. avatar Obama Trump Voter says:

    Just use this article as an example to the benefits of running adblockers. You can read moronic ideas without supporting the moronic posters…

    1. avatar TweetyRex says:

      If you want something to worry about, look up the patent for the hooked trigger guard. It was specifically designed for being grasped by the off hand. So basically, EVERY pistol made since the S&W 59 can be re-labeled an AOW. Surprise!

  31. avatar Alex Moyer says:

    Never ceases to piss me off how much power the A.T.F. has! No way in hell should they ever have the right to make there own rulings! That is something that should be up to the House, Senate, President and Supreme Court. Just like everything else that is voted on. Not surprisingly when I emailed the A.T.F. the other day asking about that they just gave a one sentence response saying “We don’t comment on pending rulings.” Fucking assholes!!! Lot’s of people like a friend of mine who is a honcho at a gun store I shop at every week said to me when I was working my security job at the Youngstown Ohio V.A. Clinic that they need to abolish the A.T.F., C.I.A, and I.R.S. The problem is though that would not make it go away. Another agency would take over from the A.T.F. such as the F.B.I. or U.S. Marshal Service. So it would be out of the frying pan and into the fire. They would probably just hire all the former A.T.F. agents to handle all the gun related stuff. So there you go! The only way around that would be to ban any former A.T.F. agent from ever have another job ever again unless it is a mailman job or scrubbing toilets at a government office or something like that. And rewrite the laws where no agency in the government by itself can change rulings on anything without approval from the House, Senate and Supreme court. Just my two cents.

  32. avatar Jon says:

    Calm down? Yeah okay…you ATF?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email