How can a firearm part be “barely legal”? It’s either legal or it isn’t. And all six firearms parts named by The Trace are completely legal. Just ask the ATF. But we thank Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun agitprop machine for highlighting the slippery slope that the NRA has created by directing the ATF to regulate bump fire stocks off the mass market. Not to mention . . .
the links to suppliers. Here’s The Trace’s “barely”legal sextet:
https://youtu.be/G0hYdfVZBe0
1. Polymer80 unfinished GLOCK pistol frame
“Because it is sold with excess plastic left in the handle, it doesn’t technically qualify. That means the ATF can’t trace a Polymer80 gun if it is used in a crime. The frames can also be sold without background checks.”
2. SIG SAUER SB15 pistol stabilizing braces
“The brace can also be used as a shoulder stock, steadied by the shooter’s body so they can aim the weapon like a rifle, with their eye right against the sights. Doing so turns the weapon into a short-barreled rifle, a weapon that is more easily concealable than a full size rifle and more powerful than a pistol.
“Short barreled rifles must be registered with the ATF under the National Firearms Act, but because stabilizing braces aren’t designed for rifle-style aiming, guns equipped with the accessory can be sold without registration.”
https://youtu.be/FjNn5tEu-N0
3. The RONI STAB
“The RONI STAB, like the Sig Sauer SB15, also uses a brace to get around National Firearm Act requirements.
“A company spokesman says in a promotional video that the product is a way to avoid the paperwork, cost, and wait time that come with registering one’s weapon before going on to note that ‘the Roni STAB is intended to be used only as designed.'”
4. The Mossberg Shockwave
“In January, Mossberg released the Shockwave, a “personal defense” shotgun that is half an inch longer than the minimum required length.
“Short barreled shotguns without shoulder stocks and less than 26 inches in length are regulated under the NFA because they are easily concealed, and were favored by criminals at the time of the law’s passage.”
5. The Black Aces Tactical
“Should the owner actually use the brace as a stock, shouldering the weapon when firing, it would technically become an illegal short barreled shotgun, if not first registered with the ATF. The agency regulates shotguns with stocks if the weapon has a barrel shorter than 16 inches.”
https://youtu.be/o5ONpFy-QR8
6. The Binary Firing System
“The Franklin Armory Binary Firing System doesn’t allow a shooter to fire as fast as with a gun equipped with a bump stock, but it can still double a semiautomatic’s rate of fire. It works by shooting twice for each full cycle of the trigger: once when the shooter pulls the trigger, and again when it is released.”
To paraphrase Martin Niemoller, first they came for the bump stocks . . .
You heard it here first: ceding to the ATF the power to regulate items outside of the letter of the law is an enormous mistake that poses a genuine risk to Americans’ right to keep and bear arms. Any arms.
I think they watch too much porn, since that phrase is common with that bunch.
And they want to convert EVERYTHING we like into “jailbait”.
Gun safety is not about safety.
Gun control is not about guns.
It is all about making us knuckle under.
Barely legal. 🙄
I think The folks over at The Trace are confusing Weinstein’s sex addiction with some people’s passion for the second amendment.
Is any one surprised that anti-gunners were going to bring up other pearl-clutch inducing items to add on the ban pile?
What I learned today is that there are so many ways to squeek around the NFA that for SBR and SBS it’s worthless. Might as well move those from Title II to Title I and simplify the law. Then the ATF can focus on busting straw purchasers and real criminals, and not people who accidentally put the wrong accessory on the wrong gun at the range.
“Then the ATF can focus on ” . . . selling illegal cigarettes.
Hopefully ending in a cop that isn’t in on it chokeholding their agents.
“I can’t breathe…”
“Good.”
If only ;-(…
I WANT!
The ATF does not exist Constitutionally, why, because Gun control is not an enumerated power delegated to the federal government.
Our federal Constitution doesn’t delegate to the federal government any power over the Country at Large to restrict our arms. Accordingly, all pretended federal laws, regulations, orders, opinions, or treaties which purport to do so are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. They are also unconstitutional as in violation of the Second Amendment.
The only proper perspective from which to view gun control, regulations, opinions is the Constitution. Congress seems to think they have authority here, which they DO NOT, but not to worry they swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution, a document which they’ve never read apparently.
Good luck with that argument when you get busted. I can tell you right now it ain’t gonna fly.
LOL
It “isn’t gonna fly” because this country has no balls. All the men are cowards.
The constitution is nothing more than toilet paper. If people truly wanted the ATF done away with and wanted any of the numerous illegitimate laws removed all they need to do is peacefully, en masse, stop obeying. Look at the results in Catalonia, for instance. Mass disobedience is nullification of “bad laws”.
But since nobody has the balls and we’ve been successfully divided into color groups and political groups and all sorts of other divisions that means we’ll never, ever be able to make a concerted effort to stand up.
So, since we are cowards with no fortitude we have the government we absolutely deserve.
Sounds strangely similar to the lame bull$#it espoused by those troubled bat$#it crazy souls in the sovereign citizen movement which is an ideology that has landed quite a number of their hardcore followers in prison cells and graveyards.
Spoken like a true debt slave.
Or jack-booted thug.
Take your pick.
I believe most of the justification of the BATF has been under the heading of regulating commerce. That’s why you need a “tax stamp” for a suppressor, SBR, SBO, AOW, etc. — they’re not regulating the weapon, per se, they’re taxing it. Of course, that explanation gets stretched to the breaking point with the outright bans on various classes of weapons.
Of course, that tax thing as a justification breaks down pretty quickly. If ATF had simply sent Randy Weaver a letter, reminding him that he had a $5 tax due for his short shotgun, instead of storming his property, they might have avoided that whole Ruby Ridge unpleasantness.
They don’t need the authority when they’ve been allowed to usurp the power.
I totally agree. I have written to the NRA, GOA and various colleges that teach Constitutional law to explain to me where we went off the the rails with regard to all of these unconstitutional laws. All of it the NFA, done to getting permission slips from the government for concealed carry. The only answer I have gotten thus far is, well nothing! No one can give me an explanation as to where the government thinks it gets the power to regulate firearms. It’s all a sham. A terrible one at that, as innocent people are being made into criminals just for exercising a Constitutionally recognized right.
The Trace doesn’t get to say what’s legal (barely or otherwise). They need to STFU. And we can sit on our hands, whatever befalls them and theirs.
Huh, they already forgot about the Maxim 50 and muzzle loaders not needing an FFL. Wonder if they’ll ever figure out how a repro cap and ball, conversion cylinder, and critical defense 45 colt can be mailed to your door and need minimal assembly.
Once upon a time, the conversion cylinder required an FFL, sine it converts the firearm into a regulated one. Has that changed?
It did? I’ve never heard of it requiring one.
“…so turns the weapon into a short-barreled rifle, a weapon that is more easily concealable than a full size rifle…”
Well, I suppose it ‘is’ more concealable than a full-size rifle, but that is like saying an F150 is more concealable than an F650. It is still not going IWB, in a pocket, or under a rain coat. Most SBRs are still rather…large, compared to a even a full-sized revolver or SA handgun.
Then there’s the practical aspect, as in…
Thugs in Chicago have taken to carrying rifles openly, without seeing the need to conceal them. (Police are not policing, so the thugs see no need to worry about them.)
Without the need to conceal a rifle while committing street crime, what good are concealed carry rules?
LOL
The fact that we’re pansies who don’t want to upset the sheeples in fantasyland is the only reason there’s “concealed carry rules”.
I have a hard time pinpointing the exact time frame but it seems like sometime shortly after the turn of the 20th century people were snowed into believing society became totally “civilized” and that the government would take care of them and their safety and so we no longer needed to arm ourselves, openly or discretely, whatever.
But, funnily enough, society has never and will never be totally peaceful or civilized…there will always be wolves looking to feast on sheep and hence the need to be armed. Why do we argue about whether you can see the tool of defense?
And don’t even get me started on the whole “element of surprise” thing or “you’ll be the first one shot” thing…I’m not looking to start the debate to ad nauseum here…
Well, thanks, guys, for putting together my Christmas wish list so early this year… Need to remember to forward this to Mrs. C.
Thanks NRA. Guess they miss Obama being in charge. I’ve always suspected they secretly liked the democrats in charge to drive fear mongering.
Don’t the gun grabbers normally focus on how you can get an 80% without a background check, not that it has no serial number?
Anyone in criminal justice able to confirm my suspicion that forensics recovering a ground off serial number is the same category (“total TV nonsense”) as “enhance button”, “DNA test back in an hour”, “flawless fingerprinting”, “facial sketch looks exactly like the bad guy” and “chemical analysis points to the exact address a crime took place at”?
More like microstamping, I’d say… Especially if you have access to an end mill, or even a dremel with a halfway decent grinding stone.
Pretty sure a simple piece of sandpaper (or even rubbing it against a rock) would make the microstamling illegible. IIRC it’s been becoming illegible just from small amounts of its intended use, so maybe just go to the range and go through a case of ammo and you’ll be good.
“Anyone in criminal justice able to confirm my suspicion that forensics recovering a ground off serial number is the same category (“total TV nonsense”)…”
The answer to that is – Maybe yes, maybe no.
There is some truth to imprinted metal leaving changes in the metal crystalline structure immediately below the stamp impression being recovered with care. It’s pretty advanced stuff.
You can *totally* negate that if you drill out the metal below the number all the way through until you can see daylight on the other side.
At that point, it’s simply an issue of the proverbial ‘blood out of rock’ thing…
The recent trend of laser etching instead of stamping the S/N is probably making that recovery process much more difficult. I can’t imagine you have to mill more than just a few thousandths beyond the depth of the laser mark to completely destroy any trace of it.
This comes down to one issue: Does Congress have the moral and legal integrity to affirmatively enshrine further legal protections into law and protect the individual rights of American citizens?
There are currently three bills in Congress, any of which would be a step in the right direction to promoting gun rights.
SHARE Act – Suppressors
National Reciprocity – 50 state concealed carry protection
The Second Amendment Guarantee Act – Pre-empts every state AWB.
Of the three, SAGA is the most important for many reasons. I am ashamed that the Republican controlled government hasn’t taken a single step in the right direction. We’re told, often enough, that the Republicans “aren’t as bad as the Democrats.” I’m afraid that won’t be enough this time. This time requires an affirmative step towards securing the Second Amendment – not kicking the can down the road for the Democrats to take up at a later date.
I like that, SAGA. Did you come up with that or is there some actually pushing for that? I think it should include a federal law that would ban congress, both state and federal, from imposing any further gun control laws.
SAGA is actually a bill in Congress. See: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3576
It practically serves the purposes you stated. Why the nationwide community of gun owners is not pressing Congress for this bill is beyond my comprehension. People in “gun friendly states” should have learned from Las Vegas that no state is safe from gun grabbers.
Unfortunately, for the most part, republicans and democrats are just two sides of the same corroded coin. This has been clearly demonstrated now that we have a republican controlled house and senate. Not to mention how our dear leaders refuse to back up President Trump.
Having read all the resolutions/bills, I’d say the SHARE Act is the most important. It is a lot more than silencers. Then I’d say the House reciprocity resolution, then SAGA, then the Senate reciprocity bill.
The House reciprocity resolution would be a back door SAGA for handguns, magazines, and ammunition of any concealable handgun. It also limits where states can prohibit the concealed carrying of a firearm to government buildings and private property with whatever the state’s equivalent of Texas’s Penal Code Section 30.06 is (owner’s of private property banning carry). It further allows residents of any state to carry on the license of any state.
Unfortunately, I cannot subscribe to comments, so I won’t reply to any comments.
This is called “piling one.” Funny, they always say that “no one wants to take away your guns” until something like Vegas happens, and then they can’t wait to ban anything and everything that they can think of. The only change this time around is that they have not directly attacked “assault weapons” with a proposed ban. (Maybe next week.)
Someone reads “the Trace”? Why?
Sometimes I think these sites are there only so other sites can link their absurd articles.
“Someone reads “the Trace”? Why?”
Know the enemy, get inside their pointed heads…
Just give them the bump stock and they will leave us alone!!!!
I saw a lot of masks come off of so called “gun rights” people last week, including companies who really, really and really fast said they stopped selling bump stocks.
How can a firearm part be “barely legal”?
It just celebrated it 18th b-day?
All of the following make it easier to aim a car or truck, which can be used to run people over whenever the driver, driven to extremes by the ease with which he (always he) can do it, has his mind kidnapped by the vehicle and made to do heinous things he would never do otherwise. Therefore we must ban – automatic transmission, power steering, electric seats, electric windows, air conditioning, electric starter, gas tanks greater than 5 gallons. Let’s take cars back to circa 1920 or earlier when they were “safer”.
Barely legal, it that like being a little bit pregnant?
Barely legal? LOL
Is like like being “barely gay”, or “barely psychotic”? I think that Bloomberg and his ilk “barely” have brains.
The good news is that the more the focus on silly novelty items, the less time they have for stuff that matters.
Problem: Focusing on “silly novelty items” brings the “stuff that matters” within reach.
j͆u͆s͆t͆ a͆s͆ a͆m͆a͆n͆d͆a͆ a͆n͆s͆w͆e͆r͆e͆d͆ i͆ a͆m͆ i͆m͆p͆r͆e͆s͆s͆e͆d͆ t͆h͆a͆t͆ s͆o͆m͆e͆o͆n͆e͆ a͆bl͆e͆ t͆o͆ e͆a͆r͆n͆ $9106 i͆n͆ a͆ f͆e͆w͆ w͆e͆e͆k͆s͆ o͆n͆ t͆h͆e͆ i͆n͆t͆e͆r͆n͆e͆t͆ . r͆e͆a͆d͆ t͆h͆i͆s͆ p͆o͆s͆t͆ h͆e͆r͆e͆…………..http://bit.ly/2zn2Zt9
The Democrats want us disarmed because we stand in their way to being dictators.
Comments are closed.