For the record, I don’t think the DOJ/ATF was trying to clarify anything.  I think they intended to muddy the waters and use fear as a tactic.  Also for the record, I don’t think fear is going to work as a tactic.

Courtesy of JWR.

Did they see this kerfuffle coming from way back and try to poison the well?  You be the judge.

Dean Weingarten.

One source confirmed the AmmoLand article by John Crump on 8 October was “on the money”.  It was claimed Associate Deputy Director Marvin Richardson was quite upset with John Crump’s AmmoLand article.

In the article, sources inside the ATF state Acting Director Regina Lombardo is “not loyal to the president”.  They state Associate Director Marvin Richardson believes pistol braces “violate the NFA”.

An Acting Director of the ATF is not required to be personally loyal to a President, but they should be expected to follow DOJ directives.

Lombardo was next in line after Acting Director Thomas B. Brandon retired at the end of April of 2019. The simplest thing to do was to make her Acting Director while waiting for approval of a direct appointment by President Trump.

GOA actively worked to prevent the appointment of Chuck Canterbury.  That meant Lombardo continued on as Acting Director, at least through the election.  The Giffords organization, which seeks numerous restrictions on gun ownership and use, approved of Lombardo’s appointment as acting director.

Don’t take at least part of the blame off Trump.  He didn’t have to nominate controller Canterbury.  He also didn’t have to do the “easy” thing and nominate this traitor Lombardo to head the ATF, even in the interim.

Trump could stop listening to his awful aids, Wayne LaPierre, and everyone else who is either (a) ignorant on how a nominee will affect the gun community, or (b) wants ill affects on the gun community and a reduction of liberty.

But give a controller and inch, and she’ll take a mile.  Part of the blame goes to Lombardo, as well as the fact that life bureaucrats cannot be fired.  This is the administrative state at its worst.

The comments are interesting, from people who blame Trump (in which they are at least partially correct) to others who are willing to make concessions (Fudds, we would call them).

Ok, so I have read all the responses and most are ban the ATF and other alphabet organizations. How about this. Lets just make it law that all hand held firearms are legal so long as they are not automatic. If you want auto, get the stamp, pay the fees and make your AR AK auto, no more of this bullshit law about how it has to have been made before a certain date. That was just another ploy to keep them out of the hands of commoners like me. I can’t afford 15,000 for a fully auto and there are so few that they go for more than that and the rich people are the only ones that can afford them.

This is a mind-numbingly daft comment.  So the infringements are what caused the elevated prices he complains about, causing him the complete inability to obtain fully automatic weapons (1986 GCA).

That follows the first part, where he is willing at a moment’s notice to give up (” … all hand held firearms are legal so long as they are not automatic”).  In other words, as long as I have gotten used to the infringements on my liberty, we’ll keep those going forward as long as you spare me a few crumbs of freedom.

How about this.

No.

Eradicate the alphabet agencies, which have no basis or legitimacy in the constitution.

We covered the idea that the recent ATF movements to regulate AR pistol braces as NFA items would have some blowback of Trump support.  There has been further development.

Washington Examiner.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives has temporarily backed off criminalizing a type of gun used by 3-4 million people in the United States until after the presidential election, likely stoking the issue of gun control.

The New Hampshire maker of a popular styled AR-15 “pistol” today said that the ATF suspended its surprise decision made last week to outlaw the gun, called the “Honey Badger” pistol.

Q, LLC told customers, “Our attorneys received a letter from ATF Chief Counsel Joel Roessner ‘temporarily suspending the Cease and Desist letter’ associated with the Honey Badger Pistol by Q. The letter states that the suspension, will remain in effect for a period of sixty (60) days … unless withdrawn or extended by ATF.’ The stated purpose of the suspension is to allow the Department of Justice an opportunity, ‘to further review the applicability of the National Firearms Act to the manufacture and transfer of the model Honey Badger Pistol firearm.’”

It said the move will delay, though not reverse, the earlier cease and desist until after the election, a tactic the company decried.

“We believe this 60-day suspension is an effort to put manufacturers, distributors, and consumers at ease, and to postpone the issue past the presidential election in hopes that a new administration will take a different view,” said the company, adding, “using licensees as political pawns is unbecoming of a regulatory agency and ignoring the underlying evaluation in this letter is simply irresponsible. Q will not succumb to this level or irresponsibility. Therefore, without further clarification from ATF on their evaluation, we will not continue manufacturing the Honey Badger Pistol.”

[ … ]

Trump officials had been concerned that it would look like the president’s team was targeting the weapon in a move that could turn the 3-4 million owners into felons unless they dismantled or changed their weapons.

However, it is expected that if Joe Biden wins election, the ATF will move forward, likely targeting all of the makers of AR pistols, and even ban the AR-15, dubbed by liberals as an assault weapon.

Well this is fascinating.  The article clearly says that “Trump officials had been concerned …”

So apparently they took notice, and noted that this would involve millions of gun owners should this interpretation become finalized.

The article also hints at the fact that the ATF believes that pistol braces violate the NFA, and want to push this in a potential upcoming administration.

They’re banking on a specific election outcome, and clearly signaling their intentions.

Trump officials should have divorced themselves from Wayne LaPierre and taken notice much earlier concerning their bump stock ban.  That involves half a million bump stock owners who became felons overnight.

They’re slow to react and have poor character judgment, not to mention poor proclivities regarding the 2A.

But of course, a Biden administration would be worse, and the ATF knows it.  They have the cover they need should the election outcome go their way.

Rep. Matt Gaetz.

The @ATFHQ is crafting secret rules restricting the possession of certain pistol braces by American citizens, which would turn millions of law-abiding gun owners into felons overnight. I sent a letter today demanding they stop.

Here is selected quotes from the letter.

ATF initially welcomed the advent of pistol arm braces. In 2012, ATF correctly determined that the attachment of arm braces to large pistol platforms does not constitute the manufacture of a short barreled rifle. This determination, consistent with law, clarified that attachment of a pistol-affixed arm brace did not constitute the making of a Short Barreled Rifle (SBR) subject to registration requirements under the National Firearms Act (“NFA”), 26 U.S.C. §§ 5801–5872, and made these important safety tools more readily available to those who need them. Central to ATF’s determination was its finding that arm braces are not synonymous with shoulder stocks and thus not designed or intended to be fired from the shoulder. Since ATF’s initial determination, over two million arm braces have been sold to gun owners. Additionally, hundreds of firearm manufacturers have sold over one million firearms pre-configured with arm braces.

Despite initially welcoming the introduction of pistol arm braces, it has come to our attention that ATF is now attempting to restrict some of the most popular arm brace configurations by creating non-public standards that are not based in statute or regulation. For example, in determining whether an item is an arm brace or stock, ATF has, through private letters, created an inexhaustive list of what it considers “objective design features.” With no basis in law, one of the “indicators” chosen to make these determinations is “length of pull,” which is the distance from the rear of the stabilizing brace to the trigger. Unbeknownst to the general public, ATF has ordained in private determination letters that it considers “any firearm with a ‘length of pull’ over 13-1/2 inches to be designed to be fired from the shoulder,” thereby making it a short-barreled rifle. However, ATF has also privately proclaimed that even firearms under this length of pull can be classified as a short-barreled rifle, if ATF identifies other (and often unspecified) applicable “indicators.” It is not clear what authority ATF has to establish these hidden standards.

We understand that ATF is currently considering restricting one arm brace model owned by over 700,000 Americans, despite it being functionally no different from the more than ten arm brace designs already approved by ATF. Were ATF allowed to proceed with issuing this determination letter or others, close to one million law abiding Americans could be made felons overnight.

What is left unsaid is exactly what brace design is being reconsidered for this classification.  Stay tuned.  It would be just like the ATF folks to state, restate, bait and switch, and then restate again in order to entrap innocent people.

It’s their bread and butter.

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.