ATF Just Released Their Brace Ruling

[JoshIronshaft]

I see your point.

We just spend so much energy trying to protect NFA work arounds, when we need to go after the NFA.

[ExFlyinguy]

Now let me get this straight....

I can remove my (illegal) brace from my AR pistol and replace it with a (legal) bump stock??

Do any of those folks making these decisions even know with a brace is?

If I remove my (illegal) brace can I replace with with a paint stirrer and duct tape and still be "legal"??

This whole thing is really stupid!!

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bump stocks are still being litigated. One Federal court has upheld their ban, another has sent it back to the lower court after ruling against the ban. IT HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED.

Even if it had been resolved, you still can't put a bumpstock on a pistol, and you never could. There is a difference between a bumpstock & a brace

[JaySmith]

What about a bumpbrace?

[GunLawyer001]

I don't know WHAT they are going to do, but I DO know that nothing in life is free.
There is a REASON they are doing this "free" thing - and "trap" makes the most sense.

Not necessarily to "catch" individuals and kick in their doors, but to gather backdoor registration data to use in the future.
There is nothing about any of this that is being done to benefit gun owners.

The reason is the Constitutional "takings clause". No taking without just compensation.

If the Feds make something you own contraband, they either have to grandfather it, or pay you for it.

The States don't have this burden, partly because they aren't Federal, and partly because when a State outlaws something, you can usually sell it to someone in another State.

[HanzMcFeely]

Another stupid question (i know, something something only stupid people)…

Anyone else see an exemption listed for folks that are actually disabled and require these braces to shoot? Where does that leave us on a legal eagle standpoint? ADA violation?

[Ilikebuckets]

The reason is the Constitutional "takings clause". No taking without just compensation.

If the Feds make something you own contraband, they either have to grandfather it, or pay you for it.

I don*t think they did either for bump stocks.

[Emptymag]

I don*t think they did either for bump stocks.

They aren't compensating anyone for braces either.

Waiving a tax is not the same as reimbursement.

At least not in my opinion.

I'm not registering anything, so what are they giving ME for my brace?
Nothing. I can destroy it and get nothing for it.

[Grizzlytrap]

I can destroy it and get nothing for it.

Or you can post in the classifieds.. You'd be floored how much old 8 tracks and plastic containers go for..

[raxar]

The reason is the Constitutional "takings clause". No taking without just compensation.

If the Feds make something you own contraband, they either have to grandfather it, or pay you for it.

The States don't have this burden, partly because they aren't Federal, and partly because when a State outlaws something, you can usually sell it to someone in another State.

Their argument would be "These have always been a violation, approving them was by mistake"

[GunLawyer001]

I don*t think they did either for bump stocks.

The 1986 ban prevented them from grandfathering, and either nobody sued, or Congress never appropriated money for compensation. Honestly, it wasn't a big deal to most people and I never researched it much. Although I did predict that an EO would not stand up in court, unlike the Congressional statute that would have been passed without the EO sucking the wind from their sails.

They aren't compensating anyone for braces either.

Waiving a tax is not the same as reimbursement.

At least not in my opinion.

I'm not registering anything, so what are they giving ME for my brace?
Nothing. I can destroy it and get nothing for it.

You asked a specific question, I gave you the answer. You have an option to preserve the value, you have the right to refuse.