Previous Post
Next Post

Apologies for all the exclamation marks! But…the number of comments left so far (59k) on the Federal Register RE ATF’s ridiculous planned restrictions on pistol stabilizing braces is simply not enough. And your comments really DO matter. Here’s just one recent example of how it can derail ATF’s anti-gun ambitions, plus a few suggestions of how to craft a meaningful comment that won’t be rejected.

First, what are we talking about here? The FPC video above explains the proposed new guidance pretty well. It’s basically the December proposed guidance — which I tore to shreds line-by-line HERE — with the addition of an asinine points system.

It’s bad. It would force stupid, arbitrary, nonsensical, and horribly vague restrictions on how the owner of an arm brace-equipped pistol is allowed to configure his or her gun.

So let’s fight it. Right now, this very minute, you need to go leave a comment on the Federal Register that clearly states you are against the proposed rule. It’ll take you 60 seconds.

Here are a couple comment rules to keep in mind:

• No profanity
• Anonymous comments will not be considered, so fill out the name and info fields
• Don’t copy-and-paste another comment; yours should be unique

Here are some topics you may want to include in your comment:

• Millions of pistol brace-equipped firearms are owned by law-abiding people who purchased firearms or pistol braces in good faith with the ATF’s express acknowledgement of their legal status. These new rules may turn many of these people into felons overnight.
• ATF’s proposed “objective” guidance is vague and highly subjective, with no quantifiable metrics. It increases confusion and fear among legal gun owners and manufacturers rather than provides clear guidance to follow.
• Many of ATF’s “objective factors” are non-sensical and self-contradictory with previous ATF rulings. For instance, ATF has always affirmed that resting one’s cheek on a pistol’s receiver extension (buffer tube), stabilizing brace, or pistol cheek rest (example) is entirely legal and acceptable. How, then, can the use of optics designed for this cheek placement create an illegal configuration?
• Many of ATF’s “objective factors” would directly discriminate against individuals based on physical stature and physical abilities, such as the very subjective “so heavy that it is impractical” weight limit. This factor is entirely vague and undefined, and would clearly violate equal protection of the laws under the 14th Amendment, the Civil Rights Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
• This is a direct attack on disabled Americans who have difficulty controlling a large format pistol due to injury or other disability, such as the disabled combat veterans for whom the pistol stabilizing brace was originally invented.
• ATF states that the purpose of the National Firearms Act is “to regulate certain weapons likely to be used for criminal purposes.” With approximately six million pistol brace-equipped firearms in private hands in the United States and literally one known criminal act committed with such a firearm, it’s clear that in no way do these guns belong in the purview of the NFA.
• In point of fact, the United States is the only country in the world to specifically restrict rifles based on barrel length, further proving that the entire concept of “short barreled rifles” requiring unique regulation is not based in fact or reality. These firearms are not “likely to be used for criminal purposes” and do not belong in the purview of the NFA.
• Clear infringement of the Second Amendment
• ATF’s unclear, secret, capricious, and ever-changing rulings related to pistol braces created this situation. Not only do these new, vague guidelines not help in any way, it is unreasonable to retroactively apply them to persons who followed previously-published and even unpublished guidelines in good faith in the past.
• Forcing law-abiding gun owners who might be in violation of these subjective, unclear new rules to register with the National Firearms Act or destroy their legally-purchased property is unreasonable.
• What else do you have? Comment below this article with other topics and avenues of attack on ATF’s latest rogue, ridiculous action.

More info can be found at FRAC and FPC.

And, yes, leaving a comment does truly make a difference. Here’s an example:

In 2015, during the Obama administration, the ATF gave up on banning M855 ammunition after receiving an overwhelming barrage of public comments against the proposed rule. From The Washington Post:

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said Tuesday it was backing down from a proposed ban on manufacturing and selling one of the most popular bullets used in AR-15 semiautomatic rifles.

The agency pulled the plug early, with still a week to go before the end of a one-month informal comment period on the proposed rule change that would have targeted these armor-piercing bullets. The ATF noted it had received more than 80,000 comments, and “the vast majority of the comments received to date are critical of the framework, and included issues that deserve further study.”

TTAG covered the news HERE.

Heck, the ATF quickly backed off on similar brace restrictions last December, literally ending the comment period early and withdrawing the proposed guidance entirely, due to the tens of thousands of public comments.

Let’s do it again. Go comment.

 

Previous Post
Next Post

26 COMMENTS

  1. The ATF was established as an arm of the IRS and derived it’s power to regulate firearms from the government’s Constitutional authority to tax. If they are waiving the $200 tax payment, the ATF loses it’s regulatory authority.

    • wrong. The NFA taxes the making and transfer, not the registration. Direct taxation is illegal. Its actually illegal for them to charge the $200, they must waive it, or I will make a lot of money suing for a class action tax refund

  2. Left my comment. Overwhelming them with comments has worked before, let’s hope it does again. Guess I’m probably on several .gov lists at this point but they have my name and address for sure now :/

  3. Good recommendations Jeremy. One correction though, I believe there have been two cases of mass murder using pistol equipped braces, not one: the 2019 Dayton shooting and the most recent shooting in Boulder Colorado.

    Ironically, the uses of those brace equipped weapons with shorter barrel lengths might have saved some lives, owing to the associated reduced bullet velocities.

  4. I noted articles reporting that quite a few criminals have been found to own pistol braces, yet there is not a single instance of such a device ever having been used during the commission of a crime. The conclusion is obvious: if they were likely to be used in crimes, since criminals already own some, then they would have already been used in crimes. So by the behavior of criminals we are informed that these are not at all likely to be used in a crime.

  5. If there’s only been 59k comments by now then I don’t expect that the “overwhelm them with comments” plan is going to pan out.

    I was under the impression that the number of comments was north of 100k, must have gotten confused with one of the other proposed rules.

    • Not sure where he got 59k. If you click on the link to the federal register it shows just under 120k comments now.

  6. I just left them a comment letting them know how much we all appreciate their hard work and we also wish them lots of luck getting this, and all other, rules passed and implemented.

    What heroes!!!

    • Not my thing but I’ll comment. Interestingly enuf I just read a Motely Fool article about ammo prices tumbling 14% last week. Still haven’t replaced my stash since I last went shooting but there ya go😏

  7. Nobody cares.

    If comments and feelings meant anything Biden wouldn’t be president.

    No one is coming, you’re on your own.

  8. Nope, not going to do it.
    When the BATFE tells me my comment is important I look at that like a cop saying everything you say can and will be used against you, then continues to ask questions.

    • *shrug* I commented. I don’t own a pistol brace, and probably never will unless it’s as a FU to these jack booted thugs. Even then I think it’ll be printed anyways.

  9. Yes, comments can help. M855 was saved due to the barrage of comments. 7N6 didn’t get anything close to the M855 comments so they just banned it because it was scary. That dried up all of the cheap 5.45 ammo for 74 style rifles and AR uppers. We were able to buy 7N6 for about 10 cents per round. The new manufacture was around 22 cpr until the panic. Luckily it is back down under 30cpr. At least put a comment in there even if you don’t own one, don’t like one, or don’t care. “Join, or die.”

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here