Even as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) on Friday released its new standards treating pistols with braces as short barreled rifles (SBRs), Second Amendment proponents prepared for a showdown with the federal agency.
These weapons will now require a federal license to be owned under the National Firearms Act.
The regulations are a component of the sweeping gun crime strategy unveiled by the White House in April 2021 after a pair of mass shootings were carried out by criminals using stabilizing braces. Attorney General Merrick Garland declared that the accessories transform pistols into SBRs and will be registered as such.
The accessories were originally designed to assist disabled combat veterans in being able to enjoy sport shooting. But now they have run afoul of gun control radicals in the federal government.
ATF Director Steven Dettelbach, in conjunction with the new rules, said that “certain so-called stabilizing braces are designed to just attach to pistols, essentially converting them into short barreled rifles to be fired from the shoulder.” He added that now they will be regulated the same way.
The National Rifle Association was clear in its response to the change. “The Biden administration chose to shred the Constitution today,” it said in a statement. The Second Amendment advocacy group added that the White House is “an enemy” of Americans’ gun rights.
Erich Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America, proclaimed that there will be a strong legal challenge against the government’s actions concerning SBRs. The new statute is just another way “to attack gun owners,” according to the group.
GOP lawmakers, NRA slam ATF rule to regulate pistol braces: ‘Unconstitutional overreach’
The Second Amendment Foundation vowed to continue its legal challenge to the ATF’s effort to “trample the rights of gun owners.” Attorney Chad Flores noted the agency’s 291-page Final Rule defines the firearm not by its objective characteristics, but rather what the ATF considers the marketing of the weapon to be intended for or its “likely use.”
This in turn means that, despite how the weapon is actually used, “a majority of the existing firearms equipped with a ‘stabilizing brace’ are likely to be classified as ‘rifles.’”
The SAF litigation was filed back in 2021, and founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said that even then “we anticipated where the agency’s efforts would lead.”
U.S. Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC) is at the forefront of congressional opposition to this regulatory overreach. The representative said that the rule “jeopardizes the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners and disabled combat veterans, which is why I led members of Congress in opposition.” He decried the ATF’s move as a “constitutional overreach” that will only turn millions of law-abiding U.S. citizens into felons.
Hudson also pointed to the obvious – that the ATF itself has on many occasions taken the position that stabilizing braces are “legitimate.” The agency previously said that “the brace concept was inspired by the needs of disabled combat veterans who still enjoy recreational shooting but could not reliably control heavy pistols without assistance.”
As of next week, legal gun owners will either need to register their weapons with the ATF or remove the pistol braces. There are an estimated 3 million of the devices in the U.S.
As the dust settles on the ATF’s explosive overreach into the rights of lawful gun owners, it is encouraging to see the broad response from across the country to this egregious action. Legal challenges are already in place, and more are likely to come as law-abiding citizens resist government attempts to strip away their hard-won constitutional freedoms.
