WASHINGTON D.C. – Congressman Pfluger is taking on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives over a new ruling on stabilizing braces. Pfluger says the new rule infringes on Second Amendment Rights.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) recently issued a final ruling to regulate stabilizing braces, which redesigns the definition of “rifle” to include weapons with an accessory made to be fired from the shoulder. Rep. August Pfluger (TX-11) released a statement criticizing the decision:
“Stabilizing braces were originally designed to help disabled veterans enjoy recreational shooting without the difficulty of controlling heavy pistols,” said Rep. Pfluger.
“The Biden Administration’s efforts to ban stabilizing braces infringes on the Second Amendment Rights of these legal gun owners. This new rule is entirely unacceptable and makes millions of law-abiding citizens, including disabled veterans, felons overnight. I am committed to fighting for the Second Amendment Rights of my constituents and gun owners across the country. I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress to protect your right to bear arms by supporting legislation like the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, the Firearm Industry Non-Discrimination (FIND) Act, and the No User Fees for Gun Owners Act.”
Subscribe to the LIVE! Daily
Required
Comments
A right given by God that was recognized by our founding fathers as necessary to enshrine in our constitution has entitled every American. With stupid people out there who also have guns and don't act right, better hope you don't miss out on protecting yourself, regardless of the origin of your freedom to do so.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkHowever, had the Founders foreseen how wrongfully we would interpret their wording of the Second Amendment thereby giving rise to our firearms nightmare they would have worded it far more carefully.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkWhen you say that we've interpreted the wording of the second amendment wrong, how specifically do you mean that we've misapplied it as the years have dwindled on? We meaning the people, not the government.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkThey recently determined that the right to privacy was "misinterpreted", could be the same.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkThis whole thread reminds me of the movie "Idiocracy".
It starts with Pfluger's verbally puking about the Second Amendment and how that which he here claims to find offensive is bloody near a offense to all that is good in the world. It is simply a load of the usual slavish rightist crap that does little to address the real issues.
Then we have Bots, whose argument does not deserve any response whatsoever because it is moronic.
Will's verbal vomit has the same value as Bots.
In addition to the movie "Idiocracy" I am reminded of the science fiction novel "The Marching Morons".
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkThe least the government should do is sell at a discount to us the same kind of weaponry they left for the taliban. I heard you can buy very cheap armored trucks, full autos, and advanced night vision in Afghanistan rn but I can’t afford the trip.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkThe only verbal vomit on this thread is yours.
- Log in or register to post comments
PermalinkPost a comment to this article here: