Update On ATF And DoJ Interpretation Of AR Pistol Braces
BY Herschel Smith
6 years ago
We discussed this a bit earlier, and TTAG has an informative update on it. For a summary, see the picture below, but make sure to read the stupidity at TTAG.
Oh dear. Am I going to have to teach some ignorant ATF agent and DoJ lawyer, who never studied geometry, the Pythagorean Theorem? Good Lord. I guess if you can’t get a job doing anything else, you go to work for the ATF.
Before we get to that, perhaps we ought to teach DoJ lawyers about the second amendment.
On November 5, 2018 at 8:28 am, Fred said:
The ATF’s new slogan is:
Measure All The Guns, Even It’s Stupid.
On November 5, 2018 at 1:47 pm, Gryphon said:
Typical (commie) bureaucratic Overreach – Make Up ‘interpretations’ of laws and ‘regulations’ to Oppress the People. Very Strange that a Jury was Cowed into accepting whatever the ‘government’ said as Truth.
And, I don’t quite Understand the “Length of (trigger) Pull” being Important in the ‘definition’ of a “Short-Barrel Rifle”… AND the Fact that this ‘definition’ is/was OCCULTED (hidden) from the People who are expected to “Obey” it.
IMO, a very short stock with a Cramped ‘trigger pull’ (like when you collapse an adjustable Stock all the way on a Rifle-Length (Barrel) AR) makes for much less Accuracy in Aiming it using Sights; some Optics may still ‘work’, but it seems to Me that a Collapsible/Folding Stock, or “Pistol Brace” just doesn’t lend itself to Shouldering a Carbine and getting Good Results.
On November 5, 2018 at 3:56 pm, scott s. said:
The guy may have won his case, but I doubt he will ever get his property back. “Domestic violence” will make you a prohibited person so fast your head will swim.
On November 5, 2018 at 10:49 pm, Herschel Smith said:
@Scott,
Perhaps, but that’s not the point I’m making. The main point has to do with the ignorance of the FedGov employee.