Help Stop the Biggest Gun Grab in American History

The ATF is up to their gun-banning tricks again. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -( On June 7th, ATF published a new notice of proposed rulemaking on its website entitled Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached “Stabilizing Braces”The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on June 10th, 2021, giving interested parties until September 8th, 2021 to file comments.

The rule seems aimed at making nearly all configurations of firearms equipped with stabilizing braces subject to the taxation and registration requirements of the National Firearms Act.

Since 2012, ATF has recognized that stabilizing braces serve a legitimate function and the inclusion of a stabilizing brace on a pistol or other firearm does not automatically subject that firearm to the provisions of the NFA. That’s because stabilizing braces were first designed and intended to help disabled veterans fire large-format pistols.

While ATF estimates that there are approximately three million pistol stabilizing braces, even other portions of the United States government recognize that this is a vast undercounting of the number of pistol braces currently in circulation. A report by the Congressional Research Service puts the estimate much higher at 10 to 40 million pistol stabilizing braces. With so many in circulation, effectively banning firearms with these devices attached would be the largest confiscatory firearm regulation in the history of the United States.

You can help stop this proposed rule by filing a comment.

These are ATF’s instructions for submitting comments:

You may submit comments, identified by docket number ATF 2021R-08, by any of the following methods—

  • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
  • Mail: Denise Brown, Mail Stop 6N-518, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20226; ATTN: ATF 2021R-08.Fax: (202) 648-9741.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number (ATF 2021R-08) for this notice of proposed rulemaking (“NPRM” or “proposed rule”). All properly completed comments received will be posted without change to the Federal eRulemaking portal,, including any personal information provided.

ATF also provided the following contact information for any questions regarding the proposed rule:

Denise Brown, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070 (this is not a toll-free number).

In addition to these technical requirements, it’s important to keep the following in mind when submitting comments.

  • Comments must be professional and respectful. While it is extremely frustrating, to say the least, that the Biden Administration is attempting to confiscate lawfully acquired firearms, making comments that include profanity will make it easy for ATF to summarily reject those comments.
  • Comments should focus on the arbitrary nature of the proposed rule. The fact that it is essentially impossible to determine when firearm is legally a pistol or a short-barrel rifle  makes the proposed rule incompatible with American principles of due process of law.
  • Comments should be individualized and focus on how the proposed rule would impact the commenter. ATF will treat all identical comments as a single comment, so it is important to avoid using a form comment.
  • This is a separate rulemaking from ATF’s plan to change the definition of frame or receiver. If you have not already, please also submit a comment on that proposed rule.

Comments on the stabilizing brace proposed rule can be submitted directly through

Due to the discretionary scheme created by the rule, the ATF Director would be given an incredible amount of power over the firearm industry. This comes at a time when President Biden has nominated anti-gun lobbyist and gun ban proponent David Chipman to head the ATF. This draft rule is just one more reason why it’s extremely important for all gun owners to contact their Senators and ask that they vote against Chipman’s confirmation.

Please check back to soon for more information on this burdensome, arbitrary, and unconstitutional proposed rule.

About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit:

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

you are correct on what you see ,the night of broken glass, or stalin and his thugs . people will have to band together and hunt down government people to stop it , police will be on opposite sides there are sheriffs who will deputize everyone with a gun in their jurisdiction to stop feds ,government will block social media to stop groups surrounding and disarming feds start of war of submission I WONT


Mine and many Americans comment to the ATF…MOLON LABE.


BATF is required by law to obtain comments, not to pay attention to them. This is part of the Administrative Law process, which allows BATF and all other Federal agencies to create and impose their own regulations on the public WITH THE EFFECT OF LAW, and which is totally unconstitutional, as only Congress has the authority to make laws. Some administrator or higher-up within a Federal agency gets a bug up his butt and decides he wants to exercise his authority and makes up a new restriction on public freedom he wants to apply and add to his resume. First… Read more »

Xaun Loc

99% of the public comments will be discarded because they don’t fit the requirements for being considered. Most of the public comments are from people who haven’t read the proposed rules (many from people who can’t comprehend legalese in the first place). A majority of comments from individuals are just copied/pasted from online articles — and far too many are copied/pasted from articles that are composed of clickbait garbage. How many comments are going to say little or nothing more than “All gun laws are unconstitutional” or “This rule would ban my pistol brace”? Those comments will all be thrown… Read more »


NRA, no one cares what you think or say, nor will we support you until you get your own house in order. Now go away and work on your problems before you become history.



Roland T. Gunner

I am sorry, but I just cannot see BATFE actually giving a rat’s ass about mere citizens commenting on their web site. Power flows from the barrel of a gun; and until we (the people) can project the threat of taking away THEIR guns, we will remain behind the curve. On the defensive. Whether that means defunding them, disbanding them, or a more severe intervention, a come-to-Jesus meeting with HIM in person; I can only speak for myself.

Sam in New Hampshire

Agreed. Why would someone down-vote what seems to be a straightforward statement of legal facts? Sometimes the comments section of Ammoland articles looks like schoolkids saying “Nyah nyah, your mother dresses you funny.”


Leave reasoned, sober comments with the ATF. The goal is not to persuade the ATF; they are a bloated bureaucracy that sees this regulation as another way to secure their jobs and pensions. The goal is to persuade congress. Few understand how much the staff of the members of congress pay attention to comments on proposed regulations; they keep precise data on comments for and against a regulation. Many times a flood of comments against a regulation has caused members of congress to pressure their leadership to convince the agency to withdraw a proposed regulation. That happened when the Obama… Read more »


Lawsuits are a waste of time. You can not reason with eviI.

Roland T. Gunner

The kerfluffle over armor piercing ammo in AR pistols came about long before pistol braces were a thing. And it was pressure on Congress that got ATF to back off of .223 ammo restrictions, not presdure on the ATF web site. And until we take a match to the National Registry, leave brsces slone. I dont want any more of my firearms tax stamped.


Even a broke clock is right twice a day. And even you can be right at least once a year. LOL!