Evidence Shows ATF Changed The Stabilizing Brace NPRM To Be Intentionally Vague

ATF Confusion Chaos Misleading Road Sign iStock-BrianAJackson 649236630
Evidence Shows ATF Changed The Stabilizing Brace NPRM To Be Intentionally Vague, iStock

WASHINGTON, D.C.-(Ammoland.com)- A new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Gun Owners of America (GOA) shows that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) might have changed the wording on the proposed rule on pistol stabilizing braces to make it less clear on purpose.

GOA’s FOIA request [embeded below] turned up an email by ATF counsel James Vann (not named in the FOIA results, but AmmoLand News verified Mr. Vann sent the email) dated April 24, 2021. This time frame was when the ATF was drafting up the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). Mr. Vann was sending “the language for any prior classifications,” which GOA and AmmoLand News believe was for inclusion in the NPRM.

The language reads: “To the extent that any prior classification of either a “stabilizing brace” or a firearm equipped with a ‘stabilizing brace’ does not comport with a determination when using Worksheet 4999, that classification is hereby rescinded.”

The NPRM makes the resubmittal for a new letter sound like a suggestion. The FOIA shows something different. ATF was specifically contemplating that the NPRM was reversing classification letters, but instead of using the language that Mr. Vann submitted for the NPRM, the ATF said manufacturers could submit a sample to the ATF to get a new letter.

The ATF seems to be hiding the fact that the Bureau was adopting a new procedure for pistol stabilizing braces.

The NPRM reads: “any maker or manufacturer who has received a classification prior to the effective date of the rule is encouraged to resubmit the firearm with the attached “stabilizing brace” to ensure that the prior classification is consistent with this new rule….”

GOA’s faulted ATF for failing to acknowledge they were adopting a new procedure for pistol stabilizing braces. The ATF also did not explain the new procedures for the devices in the NPRM. But the response to the FOIA seems to show that the ATF knew they were changing the rules but intentionally decided not to inform the industry or the general public.

The NPRM reads: “FATD’s classifications of a particular firearm allow industry members to plan, develop, and distribute products in compliance with the law, thereby reducing their risk of incurring criminal or civil penalties, or the potential for costly corrective actions, including a possible recall by the manufacturer.”

The NPRM leaves the ATF room to revoke all prior opinion letters, just like Mr. Vann’s email spelled out in his email. By not using clear and concise language, it gives the ATF deference to apply the new rules any way they choose. It will put the firearms industry and the American gun owner at a disadvantage when trying to comply with the new regulations. Gun rights advocates worry that was the purpose of changing Vann’s language that he wanted to be used in the NPRM.

The NPRM reads: “The purpose of this proposed rule is to amend ATF regulations to clarify…”

But the ATF left the rule intentionally vague. The ATF has refused to say anything specific about the status of past classifications. If Vann’s email is any indication, the old letters might not be worth anything, and all manufacturers might be forced to get new opinion letters from the ATF.

The ATF is expected to release the new rule by the end of January.

FOIA Response Email by ATF Counsel James Vann 11-30-21

GOA Comments Opposing Docket No. ATF 2021R-08 Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached ‘Stabilizing Braces

Stabilizing Brace Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 2021-12176


About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

49 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Will

The ATF has to be abolished now. It can be done by memo too since it was created by memo.

Wild Bill

That is quite correct, but we lack the one person that would write that memo

Will

WB,2024 will be here before we know it.

USMC0351Grunt

That’s our problem we have become so complacent that we sit around and wait for a particular date far off in the future rather than doing it NOW.

Wild Bill

The BATFE was created by a memo by the Sec. Treas. at that time. It would only take a memo from the Sec. of Homeland Sec (as BATFE was transferred to Dept or homeland Security) or someone higher to decommission the BATFE
No one of that level, in this administration would do that. Thus, we only lack one particular person to write that decommissioning memo.
None of us could write a memo decommissioning the BATFE so we have to wait until that person of authority comes along.

Russn8r

What needs to be abolished is “qualified” immunity for local cops who enforce unconstitutional laws.

Wild Bill

Why eliminate the doctrine of qualified immunity for only “local cops who enforce unconstitutional laws”?

Russn8r

Why not, Agent?

gregs

take some midol.

Wild Bill

Hate blinds him to all reason. I think I will take an aspirin.

Russn8r

I don’t hate. I just think you’re a snarky little B, too clever by half.

Wild Bill

That might explain how you communicate to me, but that does not explain how you communicate to all the others.
Yeah … you are a hater. You hate yourself most of all.

Russn8r

LOL. 2-way street. How’s it feel to be a snarky hypocrite? The foulness and attacks were started by your thin-skinned ex-cop side, in particular your pet chimp TEX/Will etc, whose sock puppet posts are so foul he deletes them, and you pretend not to see them.

Wild Bill

How could one see something that has been deleted. Drink up, buddy, it is the holidays!

Deg4u

Why don’t you go away to somewhere you might be welcome? Your not welcome here for all the hate you spread.

Russn8r

LOL. Why don’t you stop being a hypocrite?

Russn8r

GPhY, honey.

Last edited 11 months ago by Russn8r
Wild Bill

Yup, you are a hater. You hate yourself most of all, and that condemned you to a substandard life.

Russn8r

Far from substandard. You, on the other hand, live to post obvious crap about 1000 times a day, play good cop / bad cop, make fun of murder victims, troll, hall monitor, and upvote yourself. Pathetic.

Wild Bill

“Why not?” you ask. Well, because limiting qualified immunity for only “local cops who enforce unconstitutional laws” is not broad enough.

Russn8r

Nice try. You & other ex(?) enforcers here – especially your pet chimp TEX – whine about federal abuse, but when anyone mentions local abuse, you trash them.

You piss on victims like Daniel Shaver with your sarcasm. The guy had a wife & kids, did nothing to deserve being murdered, and you think it’s big joke.

Merry Christmas!

Wild Bill

None of that is true. Let’s have a nice big glass of whiskey to toast Christmas.

Russn8r

Go for it. Too early for me, but a troll like you prob’ly “dunno” what time it is, ‘cep’n maybe when TEX wants a banana.

Last edited 11 months ago by Russn8r
Wild Bill

Too early? I think that you never stop and that would explain your insults and fit right in with self hate.

Russn8r

Duh HUH!

gregs

exactly, should be none for any government agent. they never pay, the taxpayers pay the penalty. if they had to pay out of their own pocket most of these incidents would stop.

Wild Bill

That is the ticket. Pun intended.

Russn8r

Stop whining and slap another estrogen patch on your ass.

Wild Bill

Interesting that you would be so conversant with all those nasty things.

Russn8r

‘How do you know they’re nasty? How’s it feel to spend your life here being a snarky little B and feeding your pet chimp?

Wild Bill

I don’t, but they sound nasty. Apparently, you don’t think so.
I am able to spend a little more time here, recently, because I got the last of the horses trimmed and shoed.

Russn8r

Why do they sound nasty to you?

Deg4u

Shut up and go away from here, just anywhere from here.

Russn8r

After you, hypocrite.

CaptainKerosene

QUALIFIED IMMUMITY is important but no absolute. Consider if a small patrol is surrounded by a large hostile crowd. The suspect is arrested after a struggle. The suspect is still fighting after being cut#ed. The few officers must protect themselves and the cuffed suspect who can injure himself thrashing on the pavement. An officer places a knee on the suspects shoulder and watches the hostile crowd. The other officers watch the crowd waiting for media CD am help which is delayed because of the crowd. Officers are not wequpped with NARCON and are waiting for the ambulance to arrive. Suspect… Read more »

JSNMGC

Qualified immunity doesn’t have anything to do with criminal charges.

Qualified immunity has, in practice, become not-so-qualified immunity. Because the concept has been abused, some (like me) would like to see qualified immunity be reformed. Others want to just get rid of it. Law Enforcement should not have abused the concept and they should have done a better job of policing their own.

Last edited 11 months ago by JSNMGC
USMC0351Grunt

This is true we have proven this fundamental fact time and again by giving a child a toy and if they abuse the toy we take it away from them.

Russn8r

I put qualified in quotation marks for a reason.

USMC0351Grunt

You are exactly right!

USMC0351Grunt

We will just have to draft up a memo and get it ready for the next House and Senate to pass through to the administration. If it doesn’t work in December of 2022 we will just have to wait until January 21st of 2025. But we really do need to get serious about drafting the letter or memo that is going to do this, then put it in the hands of the representatives that are going to perform the issuance.

Wild Bill

A letter or memo from the House or Senate would not work because no one in Congress created the BATFE.

2gats

atf lied? I’m shocked!

f atf and their extended families.

PUBLISH ALL .gov EMPLOYEE HOME ADDRESSES

JSNMGC

So much hate.

Tsk, tsk.

Alan in NH

So they will try to ban pistol braces the same way they tried to ban bump stocks. I wouldn’t cut them up right away.

Arizona

The proposed rule is blatantly unconstitutional, usurps power for the aft that only CONGRESS has, and will not be followed by Americans. The 2nd Amendment limits and restricts the government and all others from having any authority over the weapons of citizens, from their choice of arms to how and where they carry them. The Constitution does NOT grant the government any authority to restrict or limit citizens or their arms. All gun control is repugnant to the Constitution, and thus per SCOTUS has no legal or moral authority.

Montana454Casull

BATF is just another unconstitutional alphabet soup agency that is to be ignored due to thier lies and deception and infringement. They were created by clowns violating thier oath to uphold the constitution. Therefore they are irrelevant !

Deplorable Bill

“A well regulated militia, being necessary for the free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The second amendment leaves no legal options for government interference relative to firearms and anything else that a militia might use whatsoever. Therefore, what the atfe is, has done and is doing is illegal per the constitution. Yes, I meant to write that sentence exactly as it is. The absolute tyranny the atfe brings to America is telling. It reminds me of what was said about king George and parliament in our declaration of independence. Sooner… Read more »