ATF Objective Factors for Pistol Stabilizing Braces Notice


Well-Known Member
May 5, 2015
Riverside, WA
I realize this forum is focused on hunting and long range hunting in particular. Still there are obviously some forum member that at least dabble in AR platforms, including AR pistols. I am posting this just to make sure members are aware of an evolving issue and have a chance to comment if they feel so inclined. The ATF/ DOJ posted a new rule making notice for comment on Dec 18th. The public comment period extends for only 14 days from when the notice was posted. The notice has the potential to impact anyone owning a pistol equipped with a stabilizing brace. Here is a link to the notice:

My personal opinion regarding the notice and proposed rule making:
  • I doubt it is a coincidence that the notice was issued the Friday before the holidays and limited to 14 days comment period that includes the holidays. The limited 14 day period is supposedly because the ATF/DOJ consider this a minor rule, despite the fact that it potentially impacts more than 3 million legal AR pistol owners. Congress being in recess is just a bonus for ATF in limiting comments.
  • If ATF/DOJ thought they had a legitimate concern and the legal authority to do so, they could have just admitted they changed their minds and declare pistol arm braces as a stock. The results would have been clear under the NFA, if they could pass legal challenges, for both owners and industry.
  • The ATF/DOJ chose not to follow the direct path in addressing their concerns but instead published this vague notice that does nothing but foster confusion. The only impact I can discern from reading the document is to coerce current owners to self register their brace equipped weapons as NFA items and to stifle commerce by creating unknowns and fear.
  • If successful, I could easily foresee this as the game plan for the incoming administrations web site's stated goal of classifying AR15s and high capacity magazines as NFA items and requiring registration.
Hopefully this helps provide information to forum members who have an interest in these issues and will give them an opportunity to either comment directly as provided by Federal law or to contact their elected representatives and express whatever concerns they may have about the proposed rule.


Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2016
SE Idaho
Well..if they go thru with this..where will it actually stop...braces on pistols?.....adjustables on any rifle?...
That means no adjustable on AR...
None on kids rifles....
None on nerf toys...squirt guns..
BB guns...and crossbows.....
Better list your telescopic pool cleaning poles too......


Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Feb 11, 2009
It's over and done with, for now! While I was putting my comments/statement together to and submit it, on the web site, it had been rescinded!


Well-Known Member
Dec 29, 2015
Does anyone remember when the ATF changed their minds on the Street Sweeper /Striker shotguns of the early 90s?? l think Lloyd Benson said they had no sporting
use, making them a Class lll weapon. $200 tax and registration. l thought they were
neat myself. Almost bought one until l realised is was a bit slow to reload
Last edited:


LRH Assistant
Here are some related products that LRH members are talking about. Clicking on a product will take you to LRH’s partner, Primary, where you can find links to LRH discussions about these products.


Recent Posts