Removing Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), representing the firearm industry, supports the ATF's proposal to remove specific factoring criteria for firearms with stabilizing braces. They argue that the previous rules were vacated by a court for being arbitrary, capricious, and outside the ATF's authority, and that removing them ensures regulatory compliance and clarity for law-abiding citizens.

Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) oppose the proposed rule, arguing that it replaces the previous Biden-era "factorial test" with an even more vague "case-by-case" classification system. They contend that the NPRM fails to provide clarity for gun owners, defends previous gun control measures, and creates a standard that allows for arbitrary enforcement by the ATF.

The commenter supports the proposed rule to remove factoring criteria for firearms with attached stabilizing braces, arguing that braces do not convert pistols into rifles. They state that the rescission will restore regulatory consistency with the National Firearms Act and provide much-needed certainty for manufacturers and gun owners.

The commenter supports the proposed rule to remove factoring criteria for firearms with attached stabilizing braces, arguing that the previous 2023 rule exceeded the ATF's authority. They urge the agency to finalize a durable reversal of the previous rule to prevent future regulatory abuses.

Felix De La Garza, a private citizen, supports the proposed rule to remove factoring criteria for firearms with attached stabilizing braces. He urges the ATF to permanently reverse the 2023 stabilizing brace rule and requests clear, unambiguous wording.