- Dec 9, 2021
- Reaction score
- Ypsilanti, MI
Bad thing is it’s not just a brace they are saying makes it a SBR but the type of sights/ forward grips ect can rule it a SBR without a brace, from what I’ve read in all this f’ing mess
It doesn't make most sense to have no AFT and their stupidity?Well under that logic, anyone who owns a regular AR with a stock on it would be suspect. I mean "technically", the stock could be removed from the AR and put onto an AR pistol? But that was ALREADY ILLEGAL...if a brace is now a stock, then they are ALL stocks...you can either own stocks or not.
What this is "really" about is that they wish people could not order the short uppers...but those were deemed "gun parts" so they don't have to go through an FFL to order them...if they "really" wanted to accomplish their goal, they would simply make a short upper have to be the registered PART and require it to go through an FFL to order.
I'm not saying I necessarily want that, but that is what would make more sense to me...owning a stock that can be used on anything that is also legal presents an issue. That is why the bump stock ban just fell...it was a piece of plastic and not part of the fire control. A belt loop could accomplish the same effect.
Before pistol braces were ever invented, people could freely order STOCKS. It becomes a crime if they install a stock onto an AR to create an SBR. But nobody was destroying stocks if they owned an AR pistol?