But the pistol brace also serves as another example of just how ridiculous our gun laws are when you consider that in practicality there is no difference between a weapon registered as an SBR and one that is a so called pistol with a pistol brace installed as they both operate and can be used and deployed in the same manner. Pistol braces are for now the only way to go and make, in my opinion, a hell of lot more sense than incurring the added cost and hassle of going the route of the SBR registration process… and not to mention the added legal issues and complications of transporting an SBR across state lines. Self defense is certainly under 100 yards – probably under 50 yards – most likely 25 yards.Īnd yes, it is sort of like a stock if one shoulders the brace. Or maybe they are just caught up with rules written before they were born – treating them like the 10 commandments, and just can’t think about the reasons why they were made – and if the reasons still hold today? They are scared to death that something rather small will be accurate out to 100 yards or more. They think the brace is being used as a stock. So, those wanting to add pistol braces to the NFA – there is some logic there. Holding it out like a target pistol – that means small and inaccurate at distance. Resting it on the shoulder – that means small and accurate at distance. Initially I read one can not rest it against the shoulder.Ī few years later I read one can legally rest it against the shoulder. Now – braces have been approved for years. Why? It scares someone that something accurate can be smaller than a regular rifle. So, a short barrel on a rifle – that is easier to conceal – tax it to death.Īdding a stock to a handgun (like Germany had in WW2) – tax it to death. Someone back then thought concealable and accurate was very scary.Įveryone knows a rifle is far more accurate than a handgun. I don’t think there were silencers in the 1930s, so maybe they were added to the NFA later?
They also thought silencers were dangerous – so they are NFA items. The $200 tax was way higher than the cost of a Tommy Gun. So, the government couldn’t outlaw dangerous weapons, so they taxed it to death using NFA. Remember the Tommy Gun was used in WW2 – and was probably great as a 50 yard automatic rifle with no kick – also for trenches. Government (and probably the people) were afraid of the gangsters are their very potent military weapons. NFA started in the 1930s – we weren’t alive then, so my opinion about it might not be correct. I will try to explain why I think? all these regulations are about.
0 kommentar(er)
