wild cat mccane said:
Not popular, but no one corrects me when I say not a single person uses it for the intent that was submitted to allow the brace...
Maybe people are simply choosing to ignore you. You've made a number of absolute statements on this forum over the years (source of government ammunition manufacture and presence of loaded chamber indicators to name a few) that were shown to be false by others within minutes of you typing them. In keeping with that tradition:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngdAorS3ezc
If your point is actually that the percentage of the people using them as intended is incredibly small, I tend to agree. You can look at SB Tactical products over the years and see that the early designs were braces that could be used a stock, at least a better stock than say a naked buffer tube. Over time those designs have become almost indistinguishable from stocks in a number of cases.
My own concern with this decision is the number of years these products were allowed to be sold, by some estimates tens of millions of them
https://www.gunowners.org/time-for-congress-to-crack-down-on-the-atfs-pistol-brace-rule/#:~:text=A%20Congressional%20Research%20Service%20report,braced%20firearms%20in%20common%20use., and the general lack of awareness of the National Firearm Act of 1934 among the shooting public. I've stated a number of times in the past that this forum is a very select subset of shooters. Many in the public have no idea that the braced pistol they were sold skirts the line of what is or isn't legal. Even among those that are, there is a general misunderstanding of what the future legislation may or may not do, as evidenced here. Further, many don't participate in online forums, watch YouTube videos, etc. Certainly ignorance of the law has been shown, time and time again, to not excuse a person from following the law. However, I think with the percentage of people that are likely unaware of the nature of the product they purchased (I've seen these sold as "fun" items in shops) and the difficulty of making those people aware of the resulting legislation (maybe the ATF will have a program in this regard) that some people will end up shooting themselves in the foot (pun intended) simply by continuing to possess this item, even with a grace period.
The other concern I have is the logistics of registering these items after the fact with an ATF that is likely understaffed for that level of effort. Certainly many that own these now will choose to take off the brace and sell them, likely at a notable loss, but even a small percentage choosing to go forward accounts for a lot of NFA processing. I'm curious what the backlog for that will end up being.