Thank you
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Are any braces legal under the new edict.
- Thread starter TRS
- Start date
If No pistol arm stabilization brace ever put out on the market for the last 10 years passes ATF's test using the four point system, well.. that would be great evidence in court that the point- system is flawed.
Even if ATF is authorized to ban arm braces that also make very effective and useful shoulder stocks, they can't do it in an arbitrary and capricious manner. They have to properly differentiate between genuine arm braces and shoulder stocks.
It's not like pornography where you can just say "I don't need a rule or guideline; I'll know it when I see it!"
Even if ATF is authorized to ban arm braces that also make very effective and useful shoulder stocks, they can't do it in an arbitrary and capricious manner. They have to properly differentiate between genuine arm braces and shoulder stocks.
It's not like pornography where you can just say "I don't need a rule or guideline; I'll know it when I see it!"
I don't know enough about the various braces that are out on the market to see if any would be approved by ATF. But keep in mind that the characteristics of the gun itself -its barrel length, its sight radius, the type of optics you use -- all factor in the analysis as well. You can't just look at a brace by itself detached from the weapon and say "it'll be OK."
No law has been passed by courts atf cant make up laws wake up people
Courts don't pass laws. Legislative bodies do. And the constitution gives lawmaking power over both taxation and interstate commerce to Congress.
Congress passed the National Firearms Act. The NRA actually helped the congressmen (who are generally ignorant of how firearms work and how they are used) come up with the definitions at issue in the NFA.
If you make a shoulder stock for a pistol it's not going to be legal just because you enclose a Velcro strap and say "if you want to, you could put that strap around your arm and call this a one-handed brace." Likewise The Congress of two generations ago that passed the NFA would think it's ridiculous (A bad idea that's worthy of ridicule)
that a shoulder stock that splits in two flexible parts at the back end...
and allows you to shove your hand into the newly created opening ...
somehow removes the shoulder stock from the legal classification as a stock.
I don't think I've ever seen a brace that would pass ATF's four points
system of classification.
But I haven't seen all the braces out there on the market just a couple dozen of them.
That doesn't mean that some manufacturer couldn't make a new one that passes. It would have to be non-adjustable, rather short, and the back side of it should not have much surface area to make contact with the flesh of your shoulder. Ideally it would taper to a point, and flexible arm straps would be the thing that makes the most contact with your body --not a blade type piece of rigid plastic.
And this kind of arm brace would be pretty much worthless to put on your shoulder anyway-- it would not be comfortable, it would not be stable like a stock, and we wouldn't like using it.
system of classification.
But I haven't seen all the braces out there on the market just a couple dozen of them.
That doesn't mean that some manufacturer couldn't make a new one that passes. It would have to be non-adjustable, rather short, and the back side of it should not have much surface area to make contact with the flesh of your shoulder. Ideally it would taper to a point, and flexible arm straps would be the thing that makes the most contact with your body --not a blade type piece of rigid plastic.
And this kind of arm brace would be pretty much worthless to put on your shoulder anyway-- it would not be comfortable, it would not be stable like a stock, and we wouldn't like using it.
Short answer is no.
That being said if you take the time to read the several suits that have been filed, and take into account the trend in recent rulings, it’s not a big leap to think this rule will not stand. Time will tell.
That being said if you take the time to read the several suits that have been filed, and take into account the trend in recent rulings, it’s not a big leap to think this rule will not stand. Time will tell.
You are completely at liberty to fit a brace to any rifle (including an NFA SBR) that you own.
Anything which may currently - legally - have a stock, can have that stock switched out and have a brace installed.
Under the current ruling however, having that brace on a pistol is a violation. Furthermore - and completely idiotic - is that should you have a brace anywhere in your posession, and also a pistol which could take that brace, you are potentially at risk of being busted for constructive posession.
Fortunately, as noted, we don't have to do anything yet and there's a fairly good chance that one of the pending lawsuits will ensure that the rule is rescinded.
Anything which may currently - legally - have a stock, can have that stock switched out and have a brace installed.
Under the current ruling however, having that brace on a pistol is a violation. Furthermore - and completely idiotic - is that should you have a brace anywhere in your posession, and also a pistol which could take that brace, you are potentially at risk of being busted for constructive posession.
Fortunately, as noted, we don't have to do anything yet and there's a fairly good chance that one of the pending lawsuits will ensure that the rule is rescinded.
109 days
