New BATF ruling on stabilizing braces today

[INPatriot]

What has been the SOP for individuals that are submitting the paperwork for the registry and then getting denied? Or is that something that comes to a head after the 5/31 checkpoint?

 

[PRasko]

Better yet, what happens some day when they "change" their mind on this amnesty period and say turn em in or else?

 

[snorko]

Nice of them to contradict their own "leader" and change the rules, yet again, nine days out.

 

[BiscuitsandGravy]

Injunction, BUT for plaintiffs only...

 

[BiscuitsandGravy]

 

[Magyars]

BREAKING: Fifth Circuit Issues Injunction on ATF Pistol Stabilizing Brace Ban - The Truth About Guns

&#9664Previous Post Minutes ago, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a preliminary injunction (download the PDF HERE) against the DOJ’s and ATF’s unconstitutional attack on firearms equipped with a pistol stabilizing brace. The lawsuit, brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and...

www.thetruthaboutguns.com

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Injunction, BUT for plaintiffs only...

Hold. Stand fast.

 

[KokomoDave]

Be ungovernable. Use tennis balls with a slit cut like us OG used back in the day!

 

[edwea]

Nice of them to contradict their own "leader" and change the rules, yet again, nine days out.

If they'll contradict the supreme law of the land, contradicting some unelected and unaccountable beaurocrat is child's play.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Be ungovernable. Use tennis balls with a slit cut like us OG used back in the day!

We are talking about ARs Dave. Not Your walker. Try to keep up.

 

[Paul30]

Since it is a "pistol" brace, I posted here in the pistol forum. I can't see why anyone would want to make people with heavier pistols to be less accurate. Better accuracy means you are less likely to miss your attacker and shoot an innocent bystander. Hopefully it will result in SCOTUS ruling all SBR are normal firearms too and get rid of having a special status in the NFA rather than being a normal pistol or rifle.

MSN

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Since it is a "pistol" brace, I posted here in the pistol forum. I can't see why anyone would want to make people with heavier pistols to be less accurate. Better accuracy means you are less likely to miss your attacker and shoot an innocent bystander. Hopefully it will result in SCOTUS ruling all SBR are normal firearms too and get ride of having a special status in the NFA rather than being a normal pistol or rifle.

MSN

Already being discussed here (in the more recent posts)...

New BATF ruling on stabilizing braces today

Can anyone catch me up on the status of the whole Pistol Brace ruling? My understanding is that as of now nothing has officially changed (meaning stabilizing braces can be used on AR pistols) but that they are talking about instituting new classification rules.

www.indianagunowners.com

 

[KellyinAvon]

Prepare to merge!!

Edit: Merged!!

 

[ECS686]

Just an advice of caution. READ the injunction carefully it appears to me it only covers the original Litigants and not EVERYONE

If I misread it by all means polite input welcomed!

 

[Mgderf]

Just an advice of caution. READ the injunction carefully it appears to me it only covers the original Litigants and not EVERYONE

If I misread it by all means polite input welcomed!

You are not incorrect.

 

[Ingomike]

Injunction, BUT for plaintiffs only...

Just an advice of caution. READ the injunction carefully it appears to me it only covers the original Litigants and not EVERYONE

If I misread it by all means polite input welcomed!

Correct…

 

[Cameramonkey]

You are not incorrect.

This. It is a VERY specific ruling, and rather bizarre IMHO. Why not EVERYONE? Or at least everyone within the same circuit.

Imagine a different scenario, such as the movie The Purge: (Plot: one day a year bad people are legally allowed to rampage and kill)

"The court hereby protects your two households from harm, and prevents the Ragers from kicking in your doors and torturing and executing your families. However, those not party to the suit may still be assaulted and killed. They are not protected from harm as a part of this ruling. "

 

[KokomoDave]

We are talking about ARs Dave. Not Your walker. Try to keep up.

It's hard to keep up when you gotta use a walker sonny boy!

 

[Dim Mak]

9 days out and they want to play more games. The ATF Director lied under oath.

9 f**king days!

 

[WebSnyper]

This. It is a VERY specific ruling, and rather bizarre IMHO. Why not EVERYONE? Or at least everyone within the same circuit.

Imagine a different scenario, such as the movie The Purge: (Plot: one day a year bad people are legally allowed to rampage and kill)

"The court hereby protects your two households from harm, and prevents the Ragers from kicking in your doors and torturing and executing your families. However, those not party to the suit may still be assaulted and killed. They are not protected from harm as a part of this ruling. "

Especially when one of the parties is a manufacturer of braces, as I understand? How does that work. They can continue to produce, etc but just can't really sell the product?