Today is election day, which for the United States happens once every two years. There is no secret that my political views are more conservative leaning, with that said I do try and be somewhat a-political in running the site. Hopefully, everyone has had a chance to go vote, make their voice heard, if not for the presidential election, for the down ticket candidates and ballot measures. In most States, that is what where your voice matters most.
We got to Texas early, we left mid day Sunday, drove all day, spent the night in New Mexico, and then drove all day Monday arriving to our destination about 2am Tuesday morning. We are beat, the last week has been a whirlwind of activity, culminating in about 24 to 26 hours of driving. We were fortunate, we fit everything we intended to. We have not even began to unpack, so who knows what survived and what did not. Either way we achieved our goal and got to our destination prior to the election results rolling out. I did not want to be caught out on the highways if chaos ensued.
In industry news, there has been quite a bit of noise made over the ATF’s recent determination letters and indications that they might be changing the rules, this time in regards to pistol braces, and pistols. A recent determination letter to Q, LLC which manufactures the Honey Badger pistol, stated that the pistol brace effectively was a stock and thus they were selling a SBR.
Controversy over the pistol brace is hardly a new thing. I am young enough to remember that the ATF issued a ruling stating that “Shouldering” a pistol brace is effectively redesigning the weapon into an Short Barrel Rifle. The ATF backed down from that interpretation, but honestly I have been waiting to see this issue come back up again, especially when the ATF reclassified Bump Stocks as machine guns.
Instead of focusing on the the Pistol Brace or on the Bump Stock, I think the real issue is more how the ATF is making determinations. This is clear as they have made indications they are revisiting what is constituting a “Pistol”. There has been some hay made over the definition of pistol, specifically that at pistol is designed to be held “By one hand”. However pistols and rifles are both often “held” by one hand, and “fired” using two hands. To you and I, this would be splitting hairs, but lawyers bread their butter by splitting such hairs.
This is the danger of broad bureaucratic powers that have been granted to the executive branch by the legislator. They are able to define and redefine how they interpret and enforce the laws at whim, and they are not bound by precedent. Groups pushing more firearm laws have been pushing bans on pistols which have a magazine outside of the pistol grip. On the national level these bans have failed, however I strongly suspect they have approached the attorneys at the ATF and are working to have the ATF interpret the law in a way that accomplishes, in part, the same thing, without having to go through the legislator.
It is my sincere hope that the 2nd Amendment Foundation, and other similar groups are able to push back against this behind the scenes effort. I strongly suspect the outcome of such efforts will be tied to the outcome of this election, which is not how it should be for something that is a constitutional Right.
Well, we are watching results come in. Over the next few weeks I’ll be working on another website, so I do not expect to have significant updates. As always we will keep top on of the Load Database, if you have some load results to submit, email me, jay@theballisticassistant.com. You can join the conversation on Facebook, or check out our latest doings over on the Instagram.
Stay Safe Out There
The Ballistic Assistant