TexasCHLforum.com

Scott B. wrote: ↑Sat Dec 19, 2020 1:21 am ATF's proposed rule is a solution to a problem that we do not have. We do not have a problem with 'pistol braced firearms' committing crimes. We have a problem with criminals committing crimes who are emboldened by a justice system that will not bother to prosecute them.

The NFA is a waste of government resources, an onerous burden on the public, and an infringement on the 2nd amendment - and has been for almost a century.

Good riddance.

Please note that ATF will not accept comments during the all-to-brief comment period if they do not conform exactly to their requirements. Of course I'm certain we'll see maximum engagement by the public during this brief window during CHRISTMAS and NEW YEARS. Talk about transparent intentions.

---
From ATF's General Notice, Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with "Stabilizing Braces"

All comments must reference this document's docket number (ATF 2020R-10), be legible, and include the commenter's complete first and last name and full mailing address. ATF will not consider, or respond to, comments that do not meet these requirements or comments containing excessive profanity.

Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 4, 2021. All properly completed comments received will be posted without change to the Federal eRulemaking portal, www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

---

Link to the proposed rule in the federal register

https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... ing-braces

Where to submit a comment, please follow their instructions or your time will have been wasted.

https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=A ... -0001-0001

"All comments must reference this document's docket number (ATF 2020R-10), be legible, and include the commenter's complete first and last name and full mailing address."

Of course they want the address of any person commenting, nearly ALL of whom probably have pistol braces. How nice and tidy for them to put a bow on their door-knocking list. I wonder if any of the lakes around here have physical addresses.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Fri Dec 18, 2020 12:53 pm Let me ask you a question TAM. Suppose a U.S. Senator where to look you in the eye and ask, "Is it true that the majority of people who own AR pistols with braces are doing so so they can possess a short barrel rifle without going through the BATFE process?" What will be your answer? Are you going to be candid and honest, or will you dodge the question?

Chas.

Charles, respectfully, I’d be perfectly candid, speaking for myself, exactly as I have previously been when I’ve admitted in other posts exactly why I built a braced pistol lower when I already owned registered SBR lowers—so that I can carry my SBR upper as a pistol across state lines when I want to bring it as a personal protection weapon when traveling......say to Oklahoma, or Arizona.....without having to jump through the tedious and time-consuming hoops imposed by BATF before I can do so. I will speak for myself. I can’t definitively presume for sure why others buy them, but would agree that most probably do so to circumvent the NFA, exactly like I’m doing. I would never attempt to transport either an SBR or a braced pistol into a state where those things are illegal according to state law. But neither Oklahoma nor Arizona have state laws against the ownership/lawful possession of either configuration of a short barreled weapon, so the interstate transportation blockade is strictly an ATF problem. I’d much rather travel with the firearm in its SBR configuration, because it is ergonomically better and balances better that way, but I can’t because the ATF imposes a stupidly arbitrary rule making it very difficult to do so. Switch a pistol lower, and voila, the problem (for me) is gone.

Restricting the use of SBRs to only those who pay for the stamps and dance to ATF's tune is ridiculous, and I’d like to see some real statistics showing exactly how much murder is committed using these kinds of weapons. When the Security Branch of the DNC's (AKA “FBI”) own statistics show that not more than about 350-400 homicides nationwide are committed with rifles annually—ALL kinds of rifles, of which semiautos are a subset, and SBRs are most likely statistically insignificant—there is literally no argument to be made that SBRs are somehow more dangerous, or that they are the choice of any well accessorized gangster. It’s crazy to insist that they are, and the numbers back me up. I have, under philosophical protest, paid the taxes for more than one SBR lowers and (for now) 4 suppressors. I can carry the suppressors across state lines without jumping through hoops as long as they are legal in the state into which I am traveling, and yet they are "firearms" per the NFA....and must be registered because they are dangerous....another patently ridiculous lie fed to the uncritically credulous unwashed masses. Both the suppressor and the lower must be registered because they are "dangerous" firearms, but one can be transported across state lines without convoluted permissions, while the other cannot? I can’t even transport that registered lower across state lines with a 16” or 20” upper on it, so that it’s not even technically an SBR any longer! The law is stupid.

So yes, I have ABSOLUTELY built a pistol lower to cynically take advantage of a loophole in the ATF's wording......JUST like I’d take advantage of any other tax law loophole. Don’t blame me. Blame the gov’t for writing bad law that makes it possible. I call it the "Trump Tax and Bankruptcy Doctrine", and if it was good for him and other rich people, then it’s good for the poors like me.

And actually, put the blame squarely on the shoulders of Congress for, instead of writing well defined law, creating agencies and then giving the unelected bureaucrats the authority to write regulations without their being put up for a vote by the people’s alleged "representatives"—most of whom are far to busy trying to line their pockets or arrange "romantic interludes" to do their damned jobs.

I know, I know. I’m ranting....not at you Charles, but at how massively stupid the whole thing is. But yes, I’d be candid, exactly as I am being candid now. So if a US Senator asked me to be candid, I’d be candid. If they don’t like the answer, then let them do their damned jobs and try to pass legislation against it......if they can. I hold most of them in contempt anyway, so I have no problem being candid with them. Speaking which, who is the stupidest Senator of all, and why is it Hirono?

And for the record, I actually have tried firing my AR pistol while using the brace as it was designed....on my forearm, with a micro RDS mounted for sighting. It works, sort of. I can hold it up and get a few shots of off before my arm tires, but with nowhere near the accuracy that I can get if I shoulder it, or than I can achieve with a regular handgun. And that greater accuracy when shouldered makes the weapon more safe, not less. So ATF and everybody else in that swamp should be happy that some would go ahead and shoulder the weapon.

Syntyr wrote:

Rafe wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: But if they are going to play games, then we should be willing to force their own rules right down their throats. I have stripped lowers in my safe. I also have another completed lower with a pistol brace on it. I could take one of my stripped lowers right now, and put a cheap pistol brace on it so that I can register them both as SBRs for free. I have no love lost for the ATF. I think the NFA should be repealed in its entirety. But until then, you beat them at their own game.

Man. I wish you hadn't put that idea in my head. I don't have an SBR because I've never wanted the NFA hassle and the $200 stamp. But I would like to have an SBR. I have enough spare parts lying around (buffer tubes, plain-Jane milspec triggers, pins & springs) to put together a couple of lowers and all I'd need to buy would be the cheapest brace I can find. Hm. And like you I have a few stripped lowers in the safe. 'Course, I'm going boating on Lake Conroe for Christmas, so you never know...

Now we have a conundrum wrapped in an enigma... I have a few stripped lowers as well...

You are both welcome.

God how I loath gov’t sometimes. It is just SO monolithically stupid most of the time.

There is a small silver lining in this stupid ATF letter, if you can call it that......

If you are put in the position of having to register a pistol-braced lower as an SBR, without being required to pay a $200 tax stamp to do so, you’ve now got a "free" SBR and you might as well put any buttstock you want on it after it’s registered. There’ll no longer be any reason to put up with the compromises imposed by braces. All of a sudden, no hassles over LVPOs, vertical fore grips, tactical lights, weight, ........

I think that the letter is vile for refusing to state any kind of specific guidelines. It is purposely vague, and intellectually dishonest. It is also a shot across the bow of the gun community, and it's getting us all spun up just as Biden is about to take office. That’s what they want. Also, SHAME on Trump for not calling off the dogs.

But if they are going to play games, then we should be willing to force their own rules right down their throats. I have stripped lowers in my safe. I also have another completed lower with a pistol brace on it. I could take one of my stripped lowers right now, and put a cheap pistol brace on it so that I can register them both as SBRs for free. I have no love lost for the ATF. I think the NFA should be repealed in its entirety. But until then, you beat them at their own game.

This is probably easier to absorb for someone like me. I already have a couple of registered lowers on our trust, to which I can mount any one of 4 different uppers we have in 3 different calibers....two in 5.56, one in .300 Blk, and one in .350 Legend. If braced lowers are somehow suddenly redefined as SBRs, I don’t really need to do what I proposed above. I’d probably just use those lowers to build something 16” or longer.

But, if you don’t have that luxury, then get yourself a cheap pistol brace and convert a lower to an SBR for free. Hold them to their word.....ALL of it. And then once you’ve done that, SUE the crap out of them for having made you destroy/turn in your bumpstock instead of letting you register it for free.......ALL changes to the law, made unconstitutionally without the participation of Congress to rewrite or amend that law.

Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 8:19 pm There's a lot I'd like to say, but I'm not putting it on an open forum with anti-2A people monitoring it daily.

Chas.

I’m not asking you to say what exactly it is Charles, but please tell those of us who are NRA members, who have financially supported the NRA over the years, and who keep preaching the benefits of NRA membership to others, that the NRA is doing something about this that doesn’t involve another concession of our rights, and that you will be able to disclose what that is in due time, when it won’t hurt a positive outcome for our side. We need some hope here.