Ruling: Millions of NRA Members Exempt From Pistol Brace Ban

thereload.com ^ | April 1, 2024 6:19 pm | Stephen Gutowski

[Paal Gulli]

"AND THE BASIS FOR THIS ‘ORDER’ IS?......................"

It's called the Chevron Rule, and it's the prevailing legal precedent. The Congress writes "open-ended" legislation and grants to the agency the power to sort out the fine details for themselves.

There is a case pending that SCOTUS has agreed to hear that will test Chevron. I forget who brought it but as best as I remember it wasn't anyone from the 2A/RKBA community. When listening to arguments as to whether they would hear the case, the Justices appeared to be divided right down party lines, 6-to-3 in favor of overturning.

[ETCM]

The whole pistol brace thing is just a way to get around the stupid law against short barreled rifles. Let’s just rid of this law and resolve the whole thing.

That and in some states to let you hunt with a rifle during "pistol season". But yeah, get rid of the NFA and let people have SBRs and suppressors without ridiculous registration and licencing.

[Billthedrill]

The judge was certainly correct about the severe penalty part - it's ten years in prison and a $250,000 fine for possession of something you acquired and possessed legally up to the arbitrary regulation change. Stroke of a pen, law of the land, you just woke up a felon. Surprise!

That didn't go down very well with the SC with respect to the EPA, who got spanked for committing just that sort of abuse. If a rule change creates millions of felons out of the clear blue sky that's beyond the scope of a federal agency and will require federal legislation - at least, because that legislation has to pass Constitutional muster as well. That, incidentally, has nothing to do with the Bruen decision, which is a whole separate criticism of this debacle. The regulation is being challenged on that ground too.

What I'm anxious about is that a Court that prefers narrow rulings may strike the regulation down on the basis of its blatant disregard of the Administrative Procedures Act, wherein it is specified that a regulation may not be presented for public comment and then a different one be substituted in its place, which is exactly what the ATF did. That bad part about a ruling on that basis is that the ATF could simply back up, re-present the actual regulation for comment, and go through the whole dance all over again.

I do agree that the root of the problem is the 90-year-old National Firearms Act, which needs to go altogether. Suppressors and SBRs are not a menace to society and the registration of full-auto firearms has been a cheat since 1986, when it was discovered that under the then-new bill nothing whatever would be allowed civilians that had not been manufactured before that date. Surprise! The NFA needs to go but I have no real hope that this court will rule that broadly. But then I thought that about Roe v Wade, too, and look where we are on that one. So there's hope, albeit mighty slim.

[Thomas Jerome]

How does an NRA member have more rights than a normal citizen?

[Dead Corpse]

The only reason there was a brace rule was to get around the idiot ATF's arbitrary BS over AR pistols. AR pistols were only a thing because of ATF's BS over short barreled rifles. Short barreled rifles were only a thing because the ATF "deemed" them as part of the NFA of '34. The NFA of '34 only had legitimacy as a TAX, but when it became an "infringement" should have been tossed out on it's ear...

We need to stop pretending along with the criminals in the ATF that they have any legitimacy at all. Them and every single arbitrary INFRINGEMENT they are currently killing people over...

[Yo-Yo]

Needs a cigar display.

L

You're right.

[Paal Gulli]

"How does an NRA member have more rights than a normal citizen?"

Read the decision and figure it out for yourself.