Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bigb159" data-source="post: 4054208" data-attributes="member: 51595">I have to agree, the example doesn't work. Parking in a handicapped space legitimately takes away parking from a handicapped person, but there's no scarcity of braces, so using a brace takes nothing from them. You're welcome to build a go-cart from an old wheelchair as long as there are plenty of wheelchairs available, but you don't block the only wheelchair ramp.I think the problem comes down to the fact that ever since states like California started instituting unconstitutional limits on 2A rights, there's been a "will it hold up in court" cat and mouse game. Subjectively, an AR Pistol looks more like a rifle than a pistol, but legally is a pistol by the definitions in the law. Subjectively an AR Pistol with a brace looks uniquely like an SBR, especially when shouldered by someone with no apparent arm issues, but legally is a pistol with an arm brace on it by the definitions in the law.ATF knows clearly what people are doing with the brace, but without 1) making braces illegal for everyone (bad optics and questionable authority), or 2) changing the definition of the brace (arguably impossible), or 3) changing the definition of a stock to be more precise (this is what they tried to do with their points system), they are not delegated the authority by law to do anything about it.</blockquote>