First they came for your bump stock, now Feds just made millions of gun brace owners into criminals


U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland signed ATF final rule 2021R-08F on Jan. 13, reclassifying millions of commonly owned pistols that have stabilizing braces. The ATF has branded these guns as illegal short-barreled rifles and shotguns, which puts them under the National Firearms Act of 1934. The rules are somewhat ambiguous, critics say.

The Biden Administration now requires gun owners to register these types of firearms with the federal government. The Congressional Research Service says that up to 40 million of them are currently in civilian ownership, and some say it’s unlikely all of them will be registered.

The rule changes the definition of “rifle” to include that which is “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.”

The rule does not affect “stabilizing braces” for disabled people, but does impact those devices that allow shouldering a pistol in the manner of a long gun for those who are not disabled. If a firearm with the stabilizing brace is a short-barreled rifle in the government’s view, it needs to be registered within 120-days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

“Any weapons with ‘stabilizing braces’ or similar attachments that constitute rifles under the NFA must be registered no later than 120 days after date of publication in the Federal Register; or the short barrel removed and a 16-inch or longer rifle barrel attached to the firearm; or permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the ‘stabilizing brace’ such that it cannot be reattached; or the firearm is turned in to your local ATF office. Or the firearm is destroyed,” ATF said.

The ATF has published a list of 40 different brands and models that are now illegal, which you can see at this link.

The ATF said owners of these guns have these options:

  • Submit through the eForms system an Application to Make and Register a Firearm, ATF Form 1 (E- Form 1) within 120-days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.
  • Permanently remove or alter the “stabilizing brace” so that it cannot be reattached and thereby removing it from regulation as a “firearm” under the NFA.
  • Remove the short barrel and attach a 16-inch or longer rifled barrel to the firearm thus removing it from the provisions of the NFA.
  • Turn the firearm into your local ATF office.
  • Destroy the firearm.

Gun Owners of America’s Senior Vice President Erich Pratt said, “This administration continues to find new ways to attack gun owners, and this time their target is brace-equipped firearms that allow persons with disabilities to safely and effectively use pistols. We will continue to work with our industry partners to amplify the disapproving voices in the firearms industry, and the Gun Owners Foundation, our sister legal arm, will be filing suit in the near future.”  

The Congressional Review Act may be used by Republicans to block the ATF rule, but with a Senate controlled by Democrats, the rule will probably end up in court when an American gun owner refuses to register his or her pistol brace and is arrested for owning it.

“The ATF is not a legislative body. Pistol braces have been used for many years… with ATF consent. Now ATF is trying to regulate them like machine guns. By what authority? Democrats controlled all 3 branches and passed no ban. This is not Constitutional,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, Republican from Kentucky.

Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado said, “Our Second Amendment is under attack by Joe Biden’s ATF. I’m not the only one who wants to see this agency defunded. We won’t be giving up our firearms to the government anytime soon.”

Republican Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois said, “The unelected bureaucrats at ATF do not have the Constitutional authority to ban guns and violate the Second Amendment rights of American citizens. I will sponsor legislation to BLOCK Biden’s ‘Pistol Brace’ gun ban and DEFUND Biden’s tyrannical ATF!”

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said, “Pistol braces and short barreled rifles aren’t the problem. Mass murderers don’t care about ATF unconstitutional rules. Murderers kill people anyways and will use any means possible to kill. Punishing legal gun owners and gun bans hurt Americans ability to defend themselves.”

Alaska Democrat Rep. Mary Peltola, who during her campaign tried to position herself as a Second Amendment supporter, issued no statement about the federal agency’s overreach of its authority. Sen. Dan Sullivan was overseas, and there was no statement from Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who has advocated for some controls on firearms.

In 2018, the Trump administration’s banned bump stocks, devices that allow rapidly fire multiple rounds from semi-automatics. This month, a federal appeals court reversed the bump stock ban, which had classified bump stocks as machine gun. The court ruling says, “A plain reading of the statutory language, paired with close consideration of the mechanics of a semi-automatic firearm, reveals that a bump stock is excluded from the technical definition of ‘machine gun’ set forth in the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act.”


  1. They will eventually get the guns. It’s too important for them to stop. And Republicans as a whole are too lazy to push back.

  2. Come on, Sarah Palin, the Alaska grandma of “reload” and “keep your powder dry.”
    Test out Garland’s new rule and take the ATF to court. Let’s see if you still got it.

    • What is with the cult of Palin? She lost twice, fled the state (not that she was often here), and yet…

      Palin is as much a religious devotion to some as abortion is to the hard left.

    • Well, “defamation of character” just backired on ol’ Sarah. She’s been crucifying someone worth a lot of money. What was started by others, just continued under her stalking by actors, I mean others. Now it’s all going to be exposed in courts.
      That’s why Scarecrow is nowhere to be found yet.

  3. Your gun’s ultimate use is to defend you and your loved ones. For this moment in time, your guns need YOUR defense. Hide them. Put them away. Don’t admit ANYTHING! Better days are ahead.

    • Exactly! Just like the Lunar New Year shooter in California! Using his braced pistol to kill 11 and wound another 9 (as of 01/23/2023). Wait, what was he defending?

    • In my opinion the federal government has no authority to tell alaskans what type of firearms we can own here in our individual state the state is more powerful then the fed and it does not violate any constitution not state or fed the power structure is man – state – fed Marijuana is not federally legal yes we have a full industry here based on it while being illegal at the federal level

    • Actually, the law allows the ATF to define things that are not defined in the law.
      In this case, the ATF does have the authority to define what constitutes a short barreled rifle. The GCA says a short barreled rifle is subject to a NFA tax stamp, but does not specifically define the extent of a SBR.
      The question here is does this revised definition constitute a change to the law (something the ATF does not have the authority to do) or a change to the implementing regulations, accommodating a technology that was not in common use when the NFA and GCA were passed?

  4. Hopefully the loyal to the US 1776 Constitution US military is behind the scenes doing what is required. Do you sense a change? Things aren’t fixed yet, though. Prepare to live an independent life. Save, get metal coins. Do the right thing. Be honest with yourself. Transformations are not comfortable. Draw as close to God as you can.

  5. An excellent start. Next, close the gun show loophole, ban assault weapons, and require insurance and safety training for all gun owners.

    • Whidbey, you couldn’t defend anybody. My 6-year old granddaughter and a water balloon would be a better defender. Go bury your head.

    • One has to wonder what kind of twisted sociopath would consistently (not to mention rabidly) troll a forum whose prevailing sentiments and political values are in opposition to his own, while consistently offering nothing — no information, no data, no logical argument — other than the mindless parroting of ruling class propaganda and gaslighting.
      Oops, I guess I just answered my own question.

    • What gun show loophole? Have you actually tried to buy a gun at a gun show? I doubt it. If you had, you would know there is no such thing.
      As to the rest of your comment, thanks for proving the slippery slope does in fact exist.

      • Gun show loophole is also used to describe the private sale of guns without a background check. I’ve purchased several firearms this way and love it but we’ve seen where many have purchased firearms this way that would never pass a background check.
        Many feel this loophole needs plugging.

        • Whidbey? Oh… no Bill. Sorry. (What happened to the hehehe at the end of every comment?) Didn’t ask you. Asked Whidbey.
          And, it is not a loophole. It is the outcome of the FFL licensing. Until a private citizen decides to sell a firearm across state lines, the Federal law does not apply. It is not a loophole at all.
          And, honestly, the average gun grabber does not know this because they have never actually been to a gun show, or purchased a firearm.

        • Once again, answering a question posed to a different reader.
          And, I do not care if 99.9% of the people who have ever lived think it is a loophole, it isn’t. Defined: “A way of avoiding or escaping a cost or legal burden that would otherwise apply by means of an omission or ambiguity in the wording of a contract or law.”
          If you privately sell a firearm, you are doing so within the bounds of the law. If the law does not apply to you, it does not apply. No loophole involved.
          And, individuals who insist it is a loophole are simply demonstrating their ignorance. Or, they are deliberately misconstruing the situation to further a political cause. Ignorance is correctable, therefore forgivable. But, deliberately manipulating language to further a political cause is not, that is malice.

    • Assault weapons? That’s ANY weapon used in an assault, which could include arms, legs, hands & feet. All of my weapons are anti-assault weapons. Two can play that word game.

      Every high school in Anchorage has rifle ranges where safety training is taught to high school students. Unfortunately, much like photography classes, it can be difficult to get the classes as they filled up fast.

      I think gun training should be provided to each and every US citizen. We are the militia. We should be better trained.

    • Oddly, the Constitution does not require any of the above.

      But the Constitution quit mattering to the far left some time ago.

  6. I’m opting for choice #5 which is destroy your gun. Poof! My guns are all gone now and I identify as no longer being a gun owner. All is good.

  7. A tyrant will push for legalizing drugs, and banning guns.
    Drugs are a way for the government to control the population.
    Guns are a way for the people to control the government.
    Any elected official that pushes for restrictive gun control or outright bans is not doing it for public safety. They are doing it to remove an impediment to their control and power.

  8. One more further note. If you wade through the “rule” it does not just turn braced pistols into short barreled rifles requiring NFA tax stamps. It turns any firearm that is capable of being fired from the shoulder, or could be converted to firing from the shoulder, into a SBR.
    So, your 1911 pistol is now a SBR because Recover Tactical, and others, sells a brace that will allow you to brace your 1911 against your shoulder to fire it. Simply because a $100 item is readily available turns your pistol into a SBR by this rule.

    • Here is the rule, so far, and it hardly would redefine that 1911 pistol an SBR unless it was “fitted with that brace:” “The rule’s amended definition of “rifle” clarifies that the term “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component,…”

      • And, that brace is available in serveral places for around $100.
        Which makes it “readily” fitted with a brace, or capable of being readily fitted with a brace.
        So, try actually… Oh, I do not know… Reading the rule, and attempting to understand what the ATF is trying to do with it. Thanks!

        • Capable of being readily fitted with a brace is not the same thing as being “fitted with that brace” which is the wording of the rule. You clearly can read with understanding here CB but keep trying-you won’t fool many on here IMO.
          I have no idea what ATF is “trying to do” but do know what they are saying, so far. Get a grip here as you are plainly out to lunch here.

          • “Capable of being readily fitted with a brace is not the same thing as being “fitted with that brace” which is the wording of the rule.”
            OK, Bill. IF you say so.
            By the way, did you read the full text of the rule, or are you relying on some blog to interpret it for you. I like to read the rule, and reference the actual sections of US Code and Code of Federal Regulations it references. It is funny how much the meaning of the text changes when you include the actual sections from Titles 18 USC, Title 26 USC, and 27 CFR.
            But, I am the one out to lunch, and you are, obviously, the font of wisdom.

          • CB, that quote is from the rule as it stood a few days ago. If you feel it’s not correct then by all means challenge it but suggesting it may be an interpretation of the rule is nothing but a cop-out.
            It is you that is making an assumption about this rule that is not backed up with anything said in the rule. While you may, in fact, believe your own bullchit here it’s on you to back up your interpretation with actual wording-Just my opinion. In other words, put up or shut up.

          • Not having any difficulty believing my bullchit.
            However, if I remember correctly, aren’t you the person who tried to convince me that magazine capacity limits would make the world a safer place? And, your evidence supporting it was “because I said so.”
            Yeah. Reliable source there.
            Tell me, do you know of any Federal or State Law/Regulation that has not been distorted for political purposes/gain? Anything you can name?
            Yet, here you are, convinced that this regulation will be applied strictly to the “letter of the law” as written. Right… Good luck with that.

          • Pretty clear that you don’t have the back-up that is required to make such a statement CB so you inundate us with other BS thinking it will suffice.
            Like I said put up or shut up here.

          • I always know when I have won an argument with a liberal. They will accuse me of spreading BS without actually responding to any of the points I have made.

          • This is not about anything other than you suggesting I’ve made up something that you know I did not by looking at the rule yourself. Again, you can either acknowledge that or stfu. Tough noogies to you CB.

  9. Thus, Rule is not a Law! ATF does not have the authority to change law through arbitrary rules. This is clearly unconstitutional and isn’t worth the paper it was written on. Biden and his communist friends know it is unconstitutional and will be thrown out in the courts. But they don’t care because it is about causing chaos in our legal system and forcing Americans to defend the Constitution. It is also about diverting attention from the numerous crimes committed by the Biden crime family.

    • Michael, You sir are absolutely correct. Trouble is… the goons over at the agency will target a couple of gun owners and do a pre-dawn raid and haul the firearm owner up on some charge or another, media attention will be generously lavished. FEAR is their weapon of choice.

      Kings will be Tyrants by policy when subjects are rebels by principle… Edmund Burke

    • Rule is not a law.
      A rule is a regulation the agency with jurisdiction uses to implement the law.
      And, the ATF has the authority to define what a short barreled rifle is when it comes to their regulations.
      The question is does their updated definition conflict with the existing law? Does it alter the existing law? if the answer to both questions is no, then their definition stands.
      However… the definition they have created is so ambiguous that is turns almost every firearm in existence into a short barreled rifle. And, that is challengeable because they have in fact created a firearm ban via rulemaking. Which they do not have the authority to do.

  10. Thank you for being the only Alaska news source, so far as I have seen or heard, to bring this to our attention. MustReadAlaska is the first news outlet I look at each morning. Then I read the Wall St. Journal. Sometimes I have time to look or listen to other Alaska news sources, but when I don’t have that time I do not feel I am somehow insufficiently informed. In the evenings I listen to Alaska Public Media’s Alaska News Nightly, and I watch Public Television’s news hour – not necessarily to obtain news but to learn what the woke lefties – enemies of democracy and the constitution – are doing now.

    So far as this topic: Why do the feds believe a 15 inch barreled rifle is somehow a threat that a 16 inch barreled rifle is not? How silly! What a waste of effort and money! Law-abiding Americans armed very well are the sole essential component of democracy. In addition to this particular effort by the Democratic Party to harass Second Amendment adherents, elected Democrats are trying to restrict ammo purchases and individual’s ammo inventories, attempting to make guns too expensive to own by requiring gun owners keep huge insurance policies, working to bring new sources of regulation by calling firearms ownership a disease that the CDC can restrict, etc. etc. The last Alaska Legislature introduced bills that echo some of these efforts (and not all of them originating with Democrats!) but by and large in Alaska, and in the entire US, many people buy their first gun every day. Thanks to President Trump and most Republican US Senators we have a US Supreme Court that is bound by the US Constitution even as we have unchecked crime in most of our large cities. Ammo, powder and primers continue to be too scarce but Americans have never had a better selection of firearms to buy, and those firearms are sold at very reasonable prices. Thank you to MustReadAlaska for understanding why every Second Amendment threat is important to Alaskans.

    • You just answered your own question, Manda.
      ANYTHING to reduce the individual’s right, and ability, to self-defend is in the sights of these evil globalist totalitarians. What is really sick is that they have so many of the public, in Stockholm Syndrome fashion, aiding, abetting and supporting them in the constant ramping-up of their tyranny.

    • Howdy Citizen. Yes JURY NULLIFICATION Know it, Practice It. When called to jury duty. Know it, Practice it. The BEST CIVILIAN ANTIDOTE to our Liberal Judge Judicial System.. Thank You. Citizen Kane for bring it up. That gives it Life.

  11. If this is all the feds have to do, then I would say defund most of them. And seriously in a country of 330 million people and more than likely atleast that many Guns out there, I’d say Good Luck enforcing these Laws. Mean while Thousands more are being bought legally and Made Legally every single day. This kinda nonsense is irresponsible and counter productive , all it will do is galvanize and organize traditional gun owners, and it will do nothing to stop hard core criminals from doing what they do best in breaking the laws. Mean while record sales in weapons and ammo will continue!

  12. Yes, Gregory must live on another Planet somewhere, Seattle Portland, dozens of other City’s have what they call revolving door justice, Wake up Gregory!

Comments are closed.