On December 23, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) withdrew its letter on brace classification from the Federal Register. Many in the firearms world were quick to herald this as a victory for gun rights, an example of the people making their voice heard, and a government agency backing off. While this is the preferable interpretation of the withdrawal to have, something in my gut tells me that this was not a victory at all. Consider that this letter was provoked by several congressmen sending a letter to the ATF asking for specification as to what constituted the legal characteristics of a stabilizing brace. It was then withdrawn after another letter (this time signed by 90 representatives) was sent in opposition to the ATF’s “clarification”. Anyone with even a modicum of firearms knowledge could tell by reading the ATF’s list of “objective features” that the verbiage was imprecise and sloppy at best, and maliciously vague at worst. But for such an opinion letter to be issued and then abandoned in a week, with less than a month until the inauguration, does not instill in me any confidence of actual progress being made in favor of gun rights.
In November, the firearms community was made aware that the Biden transition team had met with ATF director Lombardo, and discussed their top two gun control priorities: braces, and 80% receivers. Which is more likely, that the ATF suddenly changed their minds and realized the error of their ways, or that they’re willing to wait a few weeks to implement regulations on gun owners? In firearm circles, the analogy of boiling a frog alive is often brought up: you place a frog into cool water and turn the temperature up very slowly so that it doesn’t realize it needs to jump out. This method of taking away our rights inch by inch over decades has been the modus operandi for gun control proponents for over 100 years. A blanket ban of all firearms followed by door to door confiscation will not happen in the United States, at least not within the next several decades (but that’s a subject for a different article). The optimal time for the ATF to implement additional restrictions would be after the inauguration, and with over a year until the midterm elections. This period of lowered political awareness would allow it to implement regulations with minimal pushback, and a willing executive.
Frankly speaking, the question of braces is not if they will go back on the chopping block, but when, and what else will go with them. The last edition of Well Regulated discussed a potential situation where, under the Biden administration, the ATF could make good on his promise to add all semi-automatic firearms to the NFA by considering them to be “readily converted” to machine guns. Of course, the agency would likely be gracious enough to allow the American people the opportunity to register, destroy, or surrender their weapons before becoming felons, just as they offered to for braced firearms.
Perhaps these predictions may sound like fear mongering, and nothing would please me more than if they don’t come to fruition. However, when our most fundamental rights are in danger, it is better to be cautious and prepare for the worst. Look at what has happened in this country over the past year as part of the response to COVID. Hundreds of thousands of small businesses have been destroyed facilitating the largest wealth transfer ever seen in this country, meanwhile, the elites in government, media, and business continue to do whatever they want, all part of the “rules for thee, not for me” culture. They go out to restaurants, have their hair done, and party on boats maskless and carefree while the American people suffer, all in the name of public health.
Photo credit: Reason.com
Earlier this month, Joe Biden announced that California Attorney General Javier Becerra would be the director of HHS (Health and Human Services) under his administration. This is the same Javier Becerra that has been involved in legal cases ranging from magazine ban restrictions to “assault weapon” bans, he is an enemy of the Second Amendment. In recent years, gun control proponents have been rebranding their efforts to infringe on our rights as public health measures, and the imminent administration would provide a terrifying opportunity for interagency cooperation that would be all but the death knell of gun rights in America. The Supreme Court is silent on the matter, and the lower courts have been a disaster with victories few and far between. It is a very real and reasonable fear that in the coming months we will see a severe and coordinated effort from the federal government to take this political momentum gained over the last several months and point it directly at the right to keep and bear arms.
