Today’s House Oversight hearing on the ATF’s assault on the Second Amendment kicked off this morning over the agency’s attempt to turn millions of Americans into felons for legally purchasing a pistol stabilizing brace, twice defended as a legal accessory by the ATF until recently. Pistol stabilizing braces were developed for disabled veterans and were recognized as legal under Obama/Biden and Biden called for tighter restrictions . More:
… USMC and Army vet Alex Bosco first developed the first pistol stabilizing arm brace. After testing it with disabled veterans — the group it was initially made for — Bosco sought approval for his design from the ATF. He received a letter back that said, in part, that “the submitted brace, when attached to a firearm, does not convert that weapon to be fired from the shoulder and would not alter the classification of a pistol or other firearm. While a firearm so equipped would still be regulated by the Gun Control Act … such a firearm would not be subject to NFA controls.”
After releasing two letters wherein they affirmed the legality of pistol braces (during which time millions upon millions in good faith purchased the legal accessory) the ATF then released a third letter completely reversing their previous position in 2015 right before SHOT show, the annual firearms industry event, which will make felons out of the law-abiding who legally purchased the accessory.
The ATF is walking around the problem of ex post facto with a window of time to dispossess yourself of the brace(s):
Any weapons with “stabilizing braces” or similar attachments that constitute rifles under the NFA must be registered no later than May 31, 2023; or the short barrel removed and a 16-inch or longer rifle barrel attached to the firearm; or permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the “stabilizing brace” such that it cannot be reattached; or the firearm is turned in to your local ATF office. Or the firearm is destroyed.
Pistol braces change absolute nothing about the function of a firearm. It’s a moronic, unenforceable rule.
Listen to the brace’s inventor, Alex Bosco’s testimony from earlier today:
Meanwhile Democrats praised the ATF:
Sheila Jackson Lee believes that guns are not lethal without the addition of a stabilizing brace and we should let her continue believing this — but her ignorance should disqualify her from proposing legislation on, or participating in, any discussion involving Second Amendment rights, including regulation of any related industry.
The mayor of my hometown:
The same ATF flooded the streets with guns during their botched Fast and Furious operation in which they made no effort to track the very firearms they pushed into cartel hands? The same ATF that tried to cover it up while simultaneously using the failed op as justification for more gun control? Their malfeasance killed border agent Brian Terry, ICE agent Jamie Zapata, 300 Mexican nationals, and wounded scores of others. Critical, yes, partners, no.
An "insurrectionist view" of the Second Amendment is to abridge or remove the Second Amendment and irony of ironies, Bush’s view is just that. Her statement underscores the reason we need the Second Amendment.
Left unresolved by this hearing:
Seriously, these agencies are circumventing Congress and drafting law — and yes, when you can be penalized for violating the “rule,” arguing that it isn’t technically a law is just semantics at this point. Why must law-abiding Americans adhere to unconstitutional demands from unelected agencies even during this purgatory period and why can’t Congress stop this?
AFT is on a tangent and crying like a 3-year-old Cuz, they can't have it their way. Sorry AFT you are not at Burger King. They only enforce the laws the Congress pass. Not make up their own laws, called rules.
While I think BATF is the worst, it's not the only Dept. of the Government trying to trash the Constitution.