With the deadline looming only a few days away, time to comment on the two proposed rules that the ATF has published grows short. In the past comments from the public have been effective at deterring the ATF from enacting new antigun rules. And yes, that was a redundant statement. This time around the ATF and those behind them appear to be playing for keeps, so all of our comments will probably end up in the proverbial paper shredder.
However, since it cost nothing to make a comment, there is no reason not to do so. Below I will link to each proposed rule where you can then submit your comment.
There are two rules that the ATF has proposed. One of them pertaining to pistol braces and the other to what defines a frame or receiver. To be completely honest, I don’t fully understand either of these or what exactly they will do, but I will try to summaries the two rules below. But first, here is a great video by Fudd Busters on how to write a comment on a proposed rule making.
And now for a look at the proposed rules!
FACTORING CRITERIA FOR FIREARMS WITH ATTACHED “STABILIZING BRACES”
Here you can read and comment on this rule: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces#open-comment
Basically, if this passes, most AR pistols that are equipped with stabilizing braces will become SBR’s. SBR stands for “Short Barreled Rifle” and are regulated by the NFA, or National Firearms Act. These AR pistols are currently legally held by hundreds of thousands of Americans.
My thoughts are: The NFA was enacted to eliminate crime and restrict weapons in use by criminals. Pistols that are equipped with stabilizing braces are very rarely used to commit crime. The same is true for any NFA item. Really, the NFA needs to go. Because stabilizing brace equipped firearms are not used in crime, regulating them will not reduce crime.
The proposed rule will be unenforceable. The cost of enforcing a rule that criminalizes such a large number of citizens will out weigh the non existent benefits.
The proposed rule is not consistent with established firearm handling practice. The ability to fire a weapon with a single hand is used in the process of determining whether a firearm is a pistol or an SBR. The use of two hands is the established method of firing a pistol, and two hands should be used in the process of determining whether a firearm is a pistol or SBR.
The process of determining whether a firearm is a pistol or an SBR is highly subjective to the individual conducting the test. A large individual may feel that a firearm is a pistol, and a small individual may feel that the very same firearm is an SBR.
And my last though, similar to my first: The proposed rule will create much grief and will yield no benefit. The ATF’s job is to keep us safe by combating violent crime. Stabilizing braces are not used in or for crime. Hence regulating them will result in no benefit to the people of the United States.
DEFINITION OF “FRAME OR RECEIVER” AND IDENTIFICATION OF FIREARMS
Here is the link where you can comment: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/21/2021-10058/definition-of-frame-or-receiver-and-identification-of-firearms#open-comment
This one is even more vague. It may allow the ATF to regulate AR uppers as firearms. It does two distinct things. With lots of talk about “personally made firearms” (PMF’s) or “ghost guns” (way cooler!). A lot of this talk is about how FFL’s and other licensed entities should handle and mark ghost guns, so I don’t think this will effect home builders directly. However, redefining what a firearm is will effect us. Printing uppers is possible, but a pain.
Congress defined what a firearm is when they passed the GCA. If technologies or circumstances have changed, then it is congresses job to update or change the law to reflect the changes in the environment as they see fit. This matter is too great to be handled by any other then congress. The law states quite clearly what a firearm is. If this needs to be updated, congress is the only one to do it.
That’s about all I have to say on the matter. There are many very good comments that have already been filed. Well over 100,000 on each proposed rule. I have also commented. Watch Fud Busters video, keep things to the point. Follow the links above and leave your comments now! You only have to cover one of the things you see wrong with the proposed rule, at this point we are simply trying to show the ATF that there are lots of people out here that know what they are up to and don’t approve of there actions.