Gun Owners of America
AdvocacyOppose
Reversal of stabilizing brace rule
Second amendment rights
Removing Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces
ATF-2026-0335-0001NPRM
Comments
263
Last activity Jul 27, 2026
Deadline
6 days
Closes Aug 5, 2026
Net supportiSupport minus oppose · campaigns included
+89%
+89% excluding campaigns
Document
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Removing Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces
- Posted
- May 6, 2026
- Comment period
- May 6, 2026 – Aug 5, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-08930
- CFR
- 27 CFR Parts 478 and 479
- Topics
Analysis
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Include campaigns
Stance breakdown
+89%
Net support
Support245Oppose12Other6
Aggregates include form-letter campaigns. Excluding them, net support is +89% across organic comments.
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Individual
260
Trade association
1
Advocacy
1
Other
1
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Posted May 6, 2026Deadline Aug 5, 2026
May 4May 18Jun 1Jun 15Jun 29Jul 13Jul 27
Support245Oppose12Other6
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Support
Oppose
Other
Individual
94%
4%
2%
Trade association
100%
0%
0%
Advocacy
0%
100%
0%
Other
0%
0%
100%
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Reversal of stabilizing brace rule78
Support for rule finalization64
Remove brace rule43
Regulatory clarity and consistency42
Regulatory burden reduction39
Clarity of language32
Firearm stabilizing brace criteria32
Remove factoring criteria32
Remove stabilizing brace rule28
Removal of factoring criteria26
Position map
Who stands where on each issue?
Every non-silent position is backed by an excerpt from the comment.
Issues shown
Choose up to five.
| Organization | Reversal of stabilizing brace rule | Regulatory burden reduction | Remove factoring criteria | Second amendment rights |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Gun Owners of America AdvocacyOppose Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) oppose the proposed rule, arguing that it replaces the previ | · | · | ||
National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. Trade associationSupport The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), representing the firearm industry, supports the ATF's proposal to remove | · |
National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc.
Trade associationSupport
Reversal of stabilizing brace rule
Regulatory burden reduction
Remove factoring criteria
Comments
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
Filter:
- 1 comment from the past week
One comment matches your current view and arrived in the last week. Read this week's comments with stance, commenter type, and AI summaries on the paid plan.
- Jun 24, 2026Jonathan LueckeSupportIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 12, 2026Randall CarpenterSupportIndividualRead comment →
- Jun 4, 2026Aaron PiperSupportIndividualRead comment →
- May 15, 2026Lonnie OwensSupportIndividual📎 Attachment
The commenter supports the proposed rescission of the 2023 stabilizing brace rule as an appropriate administrative response to previous court rulings. However, they argue that the rule does not solve the underlying constitutional issue, asserting that the National Firearms Act and Gun Control Act are void because they infringe upon the Second Amendment.
Read comment → - May 15, 2026Connor HunterSupportIndividual
The commenter supports the proposed rule to remove the factoring criteria for firearms with stabilizing braces, arguing that the previous 2023 rule was arbitrary and exceeded the ATF's statutory authority. They emphasize that stabilizing braces are legitimate accessories for shooters with limited mobility and that the previous reclassification unfairly impacted law-abiding owners.
Read comment → - May 15, 2026Connor HunterSupportIndividual
The commenter supports the proposed rule to remove the factoring criteria for firearms with stabilizing braces, arguing that the previous 2023 rule was arbitrary and exceeded the ATF's statutory authority. They emphasize that stabilizing braces are legitimate accessories for shooters with limited mobility and that the previous reclassification unfairly impacted law-abiding owners.
Read comment → - May 15, 2026Robert MarloweSupportIndividual
Robert Marlowe, a gun rights enthusiast and collector, supports the proposed rule to remove factoring criteria for firearms with stabilizing braces. He argues that the previous rule was arbitrary and capricious, creating a de facto ban on law-abiding citizens, though he maintains that the National Firearms Act (NFA) itself should be challenged in court.
Read comment → - May 14, 2026Kevin FisherSupportIndividual
A Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) and small business owner supports the proposed removal of factoring criteria for firearms with stabilizing braces. The commenter argues that the previous rules created significant confusion and legal uncertainty for law-abiding owners and dealers, and that the proposed change will restore regulatory clarity and consistency.
Read comment → - May 13, 2026Stephen SeccaficoSupportIndividual
An individual commenter supports the proposed rulemaking to remove factoring criteria for firearms with stabilizing braces. They argue that the previous rule created unnecessary uncertainty and that restoring objective definitions aligned with statutory language will provide much-needed regulatory clarity for owners and manufacturers.
Read comment → - May 13, 2026Charles LewisSupportIndividual
An individual owner of firearms with stabilizing braces is requesting that the ATF provide a process for owners to remove SBR classifications from the NFRTR. They argue that since the 2023 rule is being rescinded, owners who registered their firearms during the amnesty period should be able to restore their pistol status without fees or penalties.
Read comment →