Please go to this link and comment. https://www.regulations.gov/document...2020-0001-0001
We only have a short time to get on the record and possibly slow this down.
Feel free to paraphrase my letter but whatever be respectful if you want to be taken seriously.
I am the licensed owner of several NFA items including two SBR's and I am commenting to register my opposition to the ATF Notice: "Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with "Stabilizing Braces"
1) My first objection: The attempt to characterize your "new criteria" as "Objective Factors" as the title suggests I find specious. Most are clearly "Subjective" and will further muddy the definition, creating confusion throughout not only the masses of current owners but law enforcement and the legal system.
2) My second objection: BATF's penchant for contradicting their own written advice to manufacturers and purchasers. The BATF issued guidance in 2012 which stated the attachment of arm braces to large pistol platforms does not constitute the manufacture of a short-barreled rifle.
3) In my non-legal opinion the BATF has exceed it's authority as limited by the "Executive Order on Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents". Constitutionally, changes to firearms law must be addressed through the legislature and not at the agency level.
4) Finally retroactively forcing current owners to comply with new rules including registration or be labeled as felons for possession of unregistered NFA items would create a tremendous backlash and panic, further hampering BATF's ability to carry out it's mandate.
Respectfully, Art Griepp
We only have a short time to get on the record and possibly slow this down.
Feel free to paraphrase my letter but whatever be respectful if you want to be taken seriously.
I am the licensed owner of several NFA items including two SBR's and I am commenting to register my opposition to the ATF Notice: "Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with "Stabilizing Braces"
1) My first objection: The attempt to characterize your "new criteria" as "Objective Factors" as the title suggests I find specious. Most are clearly "Subjective" and will further muddy the definition, creating confusion throughout not only the masses of current owners but law enforcement and the legal system.
2) My second objection: BATF's penchant for contradicting their own written advice to manufacturers and purchasers. The BATF issued guidance in 2012 which stated the attachment of arm braces to large pistol platforms does not constitute the manufacture of a short-barreled rifle.
3) In my non-legal opinion the BATF has exceed it's authority as limited by the "Executive Order on Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents". Constitutionally, changes to firearms law must be addressed through the legislature and not at the agency level.
4) Finally retroactively forcing current owners to comply with new rules including registration or be labeled as felons for possession of unregistered NFA items would create a tremendous backlash and panic, further hampering BATF's ability to carry out it's mandate.
Respectfully, Art Griepp
Comment