It actually does to an extent. Laws have to go through Congress. Suppressors are accessories. Congress made a law about accessories. It passes every test.
Pistol brace rule UNCONSTITUTIONAL
- Thread starter Thumper580
- Start date
Except recent SC rulings say it isn't and they should be covered under the 2A.
Accessories are covered by 2A.
They aren't dangerous and unusual.
You can tax a constitutional right.
It fails many tests.
Please, enlighten me with your findings. Everything I find relates to the 10th Circuit which hasn't been ruled on as far as I can find.
I think you are correct on an explicit accessory ruling. I've been listening to too many reviews of these cases and got them swapped.
So if a district court tells Rare Breed that it is enjoined from selling forced reset triggers, are you saying that Rare Breed can sell them nationwide except for that one district, with no repercussions from that federal judge? Interesting, but that is not how it works.
Same goes for a judge enjoining the ATF. They are enjoined until they can get a ruling otherwise.
The 5th Circuit, where this court is, has warned district courts against nationwide injunctions in most cases. We'll see soon how the 5th Circuit sees this one. I bet the .gov has already asked the 5th to stay the judge's ruling (although I have not checked to see whether that has happened).
Britto v. ATF
I know someone who pulled his braces and replaced his buffer tubes with smooth pistol tubes. He told me he doesn't have silencers because he doesn't want the cops knocking on his door at 3am to inspect his safe. Yes he told me this in the year 2023 and he has the internet.
Crazy! What actually happens in real life is the ATF will bust in throwing flash bangs, shoot his dog and his wife.
TLDW: ATF Pistol Brace Rule VACATED! Date: 6/13/2024
So in five months the NRA will try to take the credit and claim victory?
And even moreso, all this means is that the ATF didn't go about changing the laws through the proper channels. So do it the right way, and we'll hear it again.
FPC WIN: Biden/ATF “Pistol Brace” Ban Vacated
Today, Firearms Policy Coalition announced a major legal victory in its Mock v. Garland lawsuit challenging the Biden Administration’s “pistol brace” ban rule issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
www.firearmspolicy.org
For the moment, it's a "win." But all the Congress has to do is propose new laws to handle what the ATF was trying to do via regulation/administration. The question being, will those new laws survive judiciary review and (ultimately) SCOTUS scrutiny, if signed into law?
It's so fucked up. Illinois has banned AR15s, directly against Bruen... But it will take years to reach SC to get overturned.
I feel the same way about "Red Flag" laws. I think those will take forever to reach SCOTUS. AFAIC, they violate the 2nd, 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution. And, they afford LE an opportunity to fulfill an underlying objective of theirs... "confiscate all weapons and get them off the streets!" The NJSP and a host of other local LEAs would do this all the time. When they got wind of an owner with a sizable inventory, they'd get a judge to sign off (ex Parte) on an ERPO with little if any justification for it. They show up to the owner's house, unannounced, confiscate all the guns and ammo, all the ownership paperwork etc. etc. and leave the owner with nothing but a hearing date. You have no idea where the weapons are being taken. Even if you, eventually, are cleared of the accusations, good luck getting your property back. You'll never see them again. The LEAs do everything to keep you from getting it back. Now, if the authorities permitted "3rd party" temporary storage (not under LE control/custody), that might be a fair compromise. Have a place like GunSitters.com in PA that does the temporary storage. That would work.
Same thing with Civil Asset Forfeiture... a violation of the 5th and 14th Amendment's "Due Process" clause. Good luck getting that one repealed, though. Too much "revenue enhancement" to be had by corrupt LEOs/LEAs there.
Eighth Circuit Court Slaps Down ATF's Power Grab, Defends Gun Owners' Rights Against Unconstitutional 'Pistol Brace' Ban | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft
In a significant legal victory for gun owners and Second Amendment advocates, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s decision and issued a strong rebuke to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
www.thegatewaypundit.com
The Biden admin. ATF keep trying appeal after appeal, fortunately there are a few courts that still have some common sense.
In a significant legal victory for gun owners and Second Amendment advocates, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s decision and issued a strong rebuke to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the regulation as “arbitrary and capricious,” a clear indication that the federal government overstepped its bounds in attempting to regulate lawful gun ownership.
The lawsuit, brought by a coalition of 25 states led by West Virginia, alongside gun manufacturers and owners, challenged the ATF’s rule as an unlawful and arbitrary overreach of its authority.
The plaintiffs argued that the rule unfairly targets law-abiding gun owners and manufacturers, placing millions at risk of severe criminal penalties for merely possessing firearms with stabilizing braces—a tool originally designed to help disabled veterans like Richard Cicero, who lost both his right arm and leg serving our country, shoot pistols more safely.
Be easier if you compiled a list. I must have missed all this b/c I dont even know what a pistol brace is/was.
I can only imagine. Thankfully it got struck down. Id assume someone will appeal and double down.
How they were originally designed to be used. People like to use them not strapped and shouldered. Classified as a pistol. Except this specific one with the vertical grip is an AOW (any other weapon) which makes it subject to NFA. Pistols aren't allowed vertical for grips.
Maybe but not likely.
Pulled from net.
Under Federal law, a “handgun” means “a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand….” 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(29). Under an implementing regulation of the National Firearms Act (“NFA”), 27 C.F.R. § 479.11, a “pistol” is defined as:
"A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s)."
Pistols are not regulated under the NFA. In fact, pistols are not even included within the definition of a “firearm” under the NFA. See 26 U.S.C. § 5845(a); 27 C.F.R. § 479.11.
But a pistol length barrel can/is fired with a single hand. With or without a forward grip I can still use two hands for stability.... But, guess we'll need a court case
Similar threads
