dakota.potts
New member
As much as this is off topic, it just can’t go unchallenged
What a strange tangent you've chosen to go on. I believe absolutely it could have gone unchallenged considering we're talking about a device specifically designed for the pistol being discussed here. You understand that's what we're discussing right?
When they sell the firearm in more restrictive countries they include it with a stock because few of them have the strange laws we do about it suddenly becoming a dangerous rifle when that happens. Even if we take for granted your assumption that "most" want more regulations, I think you'd find it's only the fringe gun control advocates that would be upset at putting a pistol on a stock for easier aim. In fact many are surprised when they find out doing so is a felony.
The whole brace thing would have not been an issue if we didn't have strange unconstitutional legislation (per Miller and Heller, as stocked pistols had both militia use and common use for self defense prior to the NFA). We even had presidents who had stocked pistols in their collections scant years before the NFA passed.
All that aside it seems you have some bone to pick with the brace situation, and I'd suggest there's probably a more appropriate thread for that already under discussion elsewhere that doesn't derail this one further.