Why would the average citizen have any interest or motivation to comply with this anyway. This is illegal BS by the ATF (nothing unusual for them), and no one should give it a moment's thought.
Declaring a felony means it is a law but did not go through the legislative process required. Who gave the ATF the authority to create their own laws. If that ATF Director worked anywhere else other than a federal agency and refused to answer or did not have an answer to basic questions, they would be instantly fired. The lack of competency, honesty, and integrity within our government is unacceptable and needs to be changed.
which is why hardin v atf ruled against the ATF under lenity. when criminal punishment is invoked, and the wording is vague, deference is to the people, and not the state. and since the ATF has no statutory authority to craft law (nor can congress grant them such), and merely have authority to enforce passed laws from congress, they're getting reamed in court over this. and well they should.
Ask Trump. He gave them the authority with the implementation of the bump stock ban. BTW, that ruling has just be denutted, which should be good news for the brace ban. Any gun owner who voted for Trump should not be bitiching about the ATF pistol brace ban, nor attacks on gun owners' due process. Wake up.
@@sideshow3136 Not totally. While I agree under Trump where it had failed twice under Obama, Congress gives these agencies the legal right to create regulations with the laws that establish the agencies and set the boundaries for their creation of regulations. It's also the President who signs those laws. After their establishment and the setting of boundaries, both Congress and the President (Trump in this case) are responsible for reining in these agencies. Trump and Congress failed to rein the ATF in. When Trump had both the Senate and House in his first 2 years, little was achieved because the Republicans in Congress love to campaign on conservative issues but once they secure office, they generally refuse to follow through. Obamacare was never repealed, legislation to restrict the ATF was never passed, immigration was effectively ignored, etc.
Apparently, if the ATF Director cannot testify without appealing to his "experts," than Congress needs to haul each and every "expert" the ATF has in and grill them. This is mere obfuscation.
Agency heads never permit underlings who have relevant knowledge of the facts to testify before Congress. Why? Because the truth would be disclosed and the agency's abuses of power would be undermined.
@@gaiustacitus4242 You're absolutely right. That's why it's up to Congress to make that decision. Surely Congress knows they're going to get obfuscation and lies by bringing agency heads in. For that reason, I'm skeptical of Congress's intentions as well. If they know they're not going to get answers, then surely these hearings are nothing but political theater.
Maybe he shouldn't be Director...? Did Congress grab him from the hallway and haul him in there without him having a chance to prepare?😅 I wonder how long he knew about this hearing before it occurred?
Yes but the experts will play the same game as the agency heads do because the agencies lawyers will advise them to and their boss will demand they do it because avoiding be truthful with congress is the goal
The worst part about this isn't the fact that he wouldn't directly answer questions... It's the fact that nothing will happen to him because he didn't.
I don't think it's a matter of "wouldn't". It appears it's more of a matter of "couldn't". This guy is completely incompetent. The ATF does very little in the way of enforcing alcohol or tobacco regulations. Their primary focus is firearms and explosives, and this guy already admitted in another grilling that he is not a firearms expert. WTF? He knows very little about what he is enforcing. He's just another puppet yes-man for the globalist elites who are hellbent on destroying a free republic.
unfortunately its usually like that with any kind of testifying, or politics, everyone should be held to the same standard and no one should be exempt from the law, but many from the governent feel that because they work for some alphabet agency or for congress they are above the law.
The bureaucrats, who were NOT ELECTED, should not be allowed to decide what is legal or illegal. Having a pistol brace installed and used as intended should not be illegal, period!
Why are you getting so specific and aiding them in their efforts? Government as a whole has no business whatsoever digging into or attempting to regulate or restrict what guns I own. Period. 'All' this regulation, restriction, BS is illegal and unconstitutional.
That's the problem with our government. Most laws are written by special interest groups, not elected officials. In fact, most politicians don't even know what's in the law/s that they're passing. It's a disgrace!
The very existence of the ATF is Unconstitutional. The entire Department should be disbanded, it's agents scattered to the four winds and blackballed from LE service for life, and the Executives of ATF should all be shipped off to Gitmo, awaiting trial for violating 18 U.S.C. 2381 and 18 U.S.C. 2384...
these politicians and lawmakers are the ones who gave the ATF the go ahead to ban these things. you poor unintelligent American 🤣 just cause they're the ones barring the ATF from following the rules they set, doesn't make them the good guys
its not court, its congress. Its all for show they can simply not answer anything and then leave. That said, congress 'writes the checks' so to speak so most people comply "somewhat" in order to keep funded.
I totally understand what you are saying. It is a complicated situation. Arm braces are never used as arm braces and people defacto shoulder the rifles. It you want an SBR just get a damn tax stamp it's $200 and I think the ATF is waiving the fee so people can legally keep their SBRs that were legal before. SBRs are not illegal. You just have to register them properly.
@@tmi1234567 yet states that disallows NFA items screws over their citizens because they aren’t allowed to get tax stamps for their braces. If you do end up registering the pistol as an SBR, then it becomes more restrictive to cross state lines with these firearms and harder to sell/transfer them in the future because of the NFA designation. It’s just another attempt at restricting legally acquired firearms.
@@tmi1234567 You are confused. Fun Fact: Unconstitutionality aside, did you know some citizens cannot get a "damn tax stamp?" Not that they should anyway, just saying.
ATF was able to do that because Congress let them (and other agencies) to make regulations as they see fit. Agencies are part of executive, they do not have any business making any law that they call regulations. It's unconstitutional and should be declared null and void.
It's not being challenged directly until the courts or Congress tells them they can't engage in this sort of overreach. Anything else is just for show. This questioning is legally worthless to anyone facing charges pursuant to this rule change, except maybe if his testimony that you can separate them and it won't count as constructive is legally admissible.
Anyone gonna talk about the fact that ATF testified to "No constructive possession" for the brace? For some reason they are focused on "constructive configurations". On items which are by engineering, modular; this is an untenable and unenforceable platform to build the house of cards. Or the house of raid crews.
Instant felony charge from ridiculous rules by the atf to restrict lawful gun ownership...these democrats will go to any lengths to get rid of lawful possession.
Make the classification as clear as mud, this makes it easier for gungrabbers take a citizens firearm away and in turn makes the citizen have to jump thru expensive hoops to get it back, if at all. Well played Democrats, _there is now another special little room in Hell set aside especially for you._
And cry for the law breakers and robbers....while they spend taxpayer dollars on private security.....and I bet their guards carry all sorts of firearms....smh
Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution forbids Congress from passing any ex post facto laws that would retroactively make US citizens felons for actions that were previously legal. Instead, ATF bureaucrats who are not elected are enacting administrative laws that are making Americans ex post facto felons and sending them to prison for ten years.
Exactly, even if you somehow could convince me a brace is suddenly illegal it would only effect new made ones after the date of a ruling. Anything before that is exempt by basic legal logic.
@@tenofprime - Trump's ATF designated bump stocks to be machine guns, so they'll definitely have a go at that ex post facto felony over a stupid piece of plastic.
That'll be challenged in the Supreme Court and most definitely shot down which will open the ATF up to countless lawsuits which will most certainly drain their budget dry.👍😂
They don't write their own laws. This rule falls under the purview of the 1934 NFA. BATF is an executive authority tasked with enforcing this law. Part of that enforcement comes with interpreting the law itself, in the same way that a traffic cops needs to interpret reckless driving When a whole bunch of people are using "braces" to turn their pistols something functionally identical to a short barreled rifle with an extra piece of velcro, it's only natural that the interpretation will be revised to cover braces as well as velco-free stocks. It's the same exact way the federal government handles research chemicals that aren't quite heroin, but do the same thing
@@ArrakisHeir88 thought terminating cliches aren't arguments. What shall not be infringed? A piece of plastic isn't an "arm." Even banning all semiautomatic weapons isn't banning "arms" since you can still own repeating weapons, blades and blunt instruments
then you just started paying attention. Which is great, but Massie has been doing this a decade. And is vocal about 9/11 lies as well. "28 pages/ Massie" is a great way to spend a bit of time on TH-cam.
Not mentioned enough is that ATF is "waiving" the $200 tax stamp for an SBR. ATF has no authority to waive a tax imposed by Congress. The whole business sucks and ATF is facing 4 different lawsuits over various issues with it. All four of them should succeed on the merits.
Aside from the fact that doing so is double taxation. Pistols get taxed by the feds, the manufacturer pays this tax, and more severe restrictions are placed on their purchase, waiting periods, etc. By reclassifying these pistols as SBRs, once the grace period is over, they got the taxes on the pistol from the manufacturer, and now they get opposite taxes taken out for it being an SBR. Really this is about illegal compulsory registration.
Some states don't allow registration of sbrs. But the real F¥€|{ YOU is in a lot of states; you can carry a pistol in your car with you. With all the Democrat/globalist endorsed riots going on, people might want an AR15 pistol to help them GET HOME!
ATF: The original brace was the only one we approved and people started making ones that weren’t that one. Congress: We’ll I have that one original one so this original is approved by what you just said? ATF: I don’t know.
You cant be a felon if theres no law to prosecute you with. Its a made up rule that the ATF is trying to enforce when they have no legal authority to make laws out of thin air.
You're expecting A LOT out of a man who openly claimed in front of congress that he's "Not a firearms expert" despite being posted to the position of Director of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and FIREARMS and continually refuses to define an "Assault Weapon" claiming that's the job of congress (Pure Irony in that statement alone)
"I submit you don't have that authority and you don't have the authority to do what you did." Rep. Massie sums up the existence of the ATF in one sentence.
There needs to be a some kind of penalty put in place for not answering yes or no questions as a yes or no. A judge can order a person to answer a question or be held in contempt… same needs to happen here. “Being held before congress” doesn’t hold weight anymore, it’s looked at as a processional event by these people.. going through the motions
i'm pretty sure you CAN be held in contempt of congress, that was one of the thing mcarthy used when going after communists. he would ask "are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party" if you said yes you were arrested, if you said "no" and he thought you were lying you would be arrested for perjury, if you refused to answer you would be held in contempt (apparently you can't plead the 5th i guess) least that's how i had heard it.
Wow, just wow... first Diddleshit says all people have to do to be legal is slide the brace off - then Massie asks if the pistol in the photo with the brace slid off is legal and Diddleshit can't give a yes or no... Need to completely defund ATF. They are dangerously clueless.
ATF thinks they're entitled to do whatever they want and when directly asked they're vague and lack ANY accountability. Case by case basis in this regard is bs, they don't want to provide anything tangible so they can pass the rule and every case without exception will be a violation according to them, such a sham.
People can do breaking bad moments and steal from them, but they can’t be held accountable? Who do you think steals their goodies that they confiscate from gun owners?
So banning a device that is defacto not being used as intended with people shouldering the firearm is bad? I think people are failing to realize that SBRs aren't illegal. They only need to be registered. A registration process that is free currently if they are form 1. The reason why they are reclassified is because people are not using "arm braces" as arm braces. They are shouldering the firearm and using it as a stock. If you want an SBR, just spend the $200 go get it registered, slap a real stock on there, and not worry about any of this.
_"Case by case basis in this regard is bs"_ The worst part of that is, the default for the ATF is GUILTY. The default is SEIZURE of the potentally illegal gun, and _MAYBE_ we'll give it back in eight years, after you've spent $40,000 to your attorney.
When I think of rules, I think of Pick up the toilet seat and put it back when done. Turn the light off when you leave the room. Failure is punishable by and ass chewing. Not 10 years in prison and 250K in fines.✌
Unless they have probable cause, they can’t just raid your house. I know they do, but every time it’s taken to trial, they ATF loses. Most people just plead guilty to these charges, but if you take it to trial, you’ll never lose because people understand the ATF can’t just make laws.
@@madman026hey will just do it when you aren’t home, most people work, take their kids to school, etc. it wouldn’t be hard for them to figure out your schedule and then serve you the warrant when you are say, at the office, when most people aren’t armed. Then they simply escort you home in handcuffs to collect your shit. Most arrest warrants are served on people outside of their homes if possible for this very reason. They know they have a greater likelihood of you complying when you aren’t barricaded in your house where you have the upper hand and know the layout.
Yeah ATF’s track record on cases that actually go to trial is abysmal. They just lost the bump stock case & they’re going to lose this case too. Congress has turned a blind eye to the ATF for decades & it’s long overdue for them to get their comeuppance.
So the real question is now that congress has gotten together twice on this brace subject what will happen? Will they punish the ATF and nullify the unconstitutional rule, or do nothing to protect the law abiding citizens from this infringement and overreach.
Congress has oversight on the executive branch agencies they set up by law. ATF was created by and foes answer to Congress. They can remove it from existence. However, that bill goes through the usual process. Therefore, the democrats are the ones stopping this. They take zero interest in the merits of the complaints. They want to use the ATF to enact gun control. GOP can't do anything. I don't know how many care in the broader GOP assembly in D.C., but Massie cares a lot. There are several very pro-Constitution people in right now. They could apply the pressure to achieve it if A) GOP had a veto-proof majority or B) Dems had anyone who gave a damn and wanted to steer the party.
its just hard to argue something so stupid when its clear the intent is overreaching authoritarian rulemaking. This will go unresolved until someone or several americans get prosecuted then the SCOTUS gets involved and tosses it out just like the bump stock. Bump stocks are novelty items, so is this floppy stock/brace. Al the least, we need to remove SBRs from the registry and move on to suppressors. I want to see the repeal of the 1934 NFA. Full auto friday for everyone.
@@evelynwaugh4053 The guy would not answer the questions and continued to just babble. Massie wasn't having it. They were all very simple yes or no answers that anyone with any understanding of braces could have answered. But when you have no legal, moral, or logical ground to stand on you can't answer those questions. If the guy actually wanted to answer those questions he could have. Also, the ATF wants people to send them their weapons so they can determine if they are illegal or not.? That's a one way ticket and you will never see your gun again. What a trap. And on top of that the guy lied about about everything being legal if you just take the brace off. There is a whole confusing list of parameters like the type of buffer tube, sights, optics, length of pull, barrel length, pistol grips and so on that could still allow the ATF to prosecute someone.
Glad they're bringing up "constructive intent" when it comes to having the brace off of the pistol. It's going to become much more important further down the road on this. It goes to the "The ATF when the paintjob on my pistol upper, matches the paintjob on my rifle lower" meme, but in a more realistic sense. The ATF could in the same logic could call having those two firearms in the same safe "constructive intent".
That line was a lie though, the grace period isn't going to immediately make people felons, that was the director's point. You have to prove *criminal intent* for it to be a felony, which means proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the person's intention was to violate the law. If you didn't mean to break any laws, its literally not a crime. You do NOT have to prove you didn't mean to commit a crime either, the prosecution must *prove* you did intend to commit a crime.
@@Veretax The criminal intent qualification already covers that. If it was legal when you did it, then it is literally impossible to prove criminal intent.
@@P010010010100101 Extremely easy to *say,* but its actually exceedingly difficult to *prove* in court, because that's what they have to do. Prove, not say.
back in, i don’t know, fourth grade, we learned about the branches of government. one of the things I remember was when my teacher said, “the executive branch can’t make laws.” I think the ATF should talk to my fourth grade teacher.
Careful relying on teachers to accurately portray things. I remember learning that the job of SCOTUS was to interpret the Constitution.... which clearly isn't the case.
@@James-wy6py true. Imagine getting an answer from this F.A.T. agent when you ask if the lemonade contains fluoridated water? ~"Well... fluoride has been proven to be good for your teeth but we don't add fluoride to the lemonade and the water we get [from the tap] does not contain vulgar fluoride." ... excludes the two types of fluoride compounds that ARE added. I wouldn't want lemonade from this sorceror.
The “Director” of these executive agencies should know some of these things before appearing before Congress. Shocking how nobody from this administration seems to know how to answer ANYTHING they are asked.
I might argue he knows exactly what he is being asked, what the rules are and is dancing around the questions based on how he wants to be heard. Which in my opinion is even more disturbing. He knows exactly what the ATF is doing and why it is doing it. He just cant say it out loud.
At the very end he says, "The piece of plastic, in and of itself, does not..." like he was saying that just having a pistol brace isn't a violation. Well, the recent Auto Key Card case verdict would beg to differ. In that case, they judged the *intention* of what the metal card with a drawing on it would be used for. Not the actual use. So the AFT is speaking out of both sides of their mouth.
That is one of the strongest points I have heard to date. Also does having a silencer not attached to a firearm without a tax stamp still make you a felon?
@magic1wizard Call the ATF multiple and ask them them the same question everytime. You will get multiple different answers with most of them being wrong. He doesn't know shit about it.
It's much worse than that; he knows enough to know that it's BS and also knows that nothing will happen to him for doing it. If he didn't have immunity he would not be changing laws and rules willy nilly like this.
@@desert4seat The men in southern Ukraine are not fighting to save their country. They are business as usual - - and claim to be relatively unaffected. Just like Syria - - men of fighting age left for Europe. They did not fight for their country.
Is there an advantage for an able-bodied shooter to shoulder a pistol brace designed for handicap shooters? Form 4 tax stamps are about $200 anyways, only way you can't afford $200 is if you don't have a job.
@@ddums89 If I change the front grill on my 2010 Jeep it becomes individual to me. Highly stylish with better airflow function than the original. The DMV one day decides that it is dangerous and unsafe (unusual) and I must remove it under penalty of law OR pay $200 and it automatically becomes safe again, not dangerous or even unusual. Why? Because it is after June 1,2023 that's why. "... Shall not be infringed".
@@Betterifitsfree Ok not a great analogy there, how would a grill on a jeep better help a handicap driver or passanger? I think a better one you could use is if you installed a wheelchair lift, or a mobility trailer on the back. Also bad analogy because I do not know of any pistol braces that are more comfortable than a buttstock.
I’ve heard the line “I’ll have to get back to you on that” or something similar from every department or agency head in this administration. My response to all of them would be “Do you own a cellphone?” Make a call and get me the info NOW. None of this “I’ll get back to you” crap.
@@klj2382 I've said "I'll get back to you" pretty often in my job. Not fired yet. How many people does this guy leqd? You expect him to know by heart everything the ATF does? He's responsible for it, don't get me wrong, that's part of his job. But "how many people have registered braces?" if I get asked that question, I'd reach out to my team, get them to pull the list of all items classified as braces and then they'll check how many are classified for each. That's a few hours to days not a 2 min call. Feel free to not agree with the guy, but try to not be an idiot while you are
ATF has literally gotten people under "intent to" for people having the right sized oil filter in their garage. They would definitely nail you for owning both parts.
@@gianni_schicchi 45 and 110 years if I remember correctly. Even though witnesses testified you had to machine the part with some knowledge of gunsmithing, and they still either didn't work, or worked poorly. It was a joke item, but they got more jailtime than drug dealers and killers for something that skilled individuals have trouble making work with professional tools. This government is a joke.
The problem is that the rule is a relic from an earlier version of the NFA that was later removed, but the SBR rule was not removed. The correct course of action would be to remove SBR classifications from the NFA.
That's the real kicker. One of the original intents of the NFA was to prohibit pistols. They added the SBR/SBS rules to prevent people from claiming that their otherwise banned pistols are infact rifles or shotguns. When the pistol prohibition was removed from the draft, the SBR/SBS rule wasn't, leaving us with this frankly stupid vestigial law.
OR... hear me out... we just get rid of the NFA... defund and disband the ATF... we have all the records destroyed if they have been put into any form of searchable database, prosecute anyone who was making the database (or just make all their information available through a simple FOIA request... (then the snitches can look over their shoulders, and worry if someone may kick in their door... fun to turn the tables)
Should’ve asked him at the end “does anyone *other than congress* have the authority to reclassify this weapon because it can be shouldered?” The ATF guy keeps falling back on the “firearms experts” but that has no leverage or legitimacy because even said experts don’t have the authority to reclassify. It doesn’t matter what they think, we are not a country run by a panel of “experts,” we are run by representatives who swore an oath to uphold our constitution and all the rights entailed within it.
Unfortunately, the second amendment isn't just a short amendment to the left. You have to understand that they lie to themselves so much that their idea is their reality.
Ever since nuclear proliferation of the 1950s "the experts" deemed it necessary that we become world run by panels of "experts" they just weren't supposed to make it so goddamm obvious.
Q: How to fix this problem? A: Abolish the ATF. There is no reason for that organization to exist, or firearm problems that states cant handle themself. #AbolishTheATF #DefundTheATF
Massie makes a great point here at the end. If the firearm can be reclassified simply because people are misusing the brace to shoulder the weapon, ANY AR pistol with or without the brace can be reclassified as an SBR because shooters are shouldering the buffer tube.
Well lets flip that, shall we? What is the actual difference between the AR pistol in question and an AR-15 being fired with one hand from an unshouldered position? An AR Pistol chambered in 5.56mm should count as a rifle. Unless you're specifically talking about the 9mm and other pistol caliber variants, there's a lot of room to say that is literally just a rifle without the stock.
In the private sector, when you fail to answer questions from the person who signs your pay check, you likely get fired. ATF director should also be fired for the same action.
It was infuriating when the director started 'explaining' his answers to "Does this make the gun fire more rapidly?", etc. I was almost yelling at my screen "Yes or no?!?"
Congress should make a law stating that repeated non answers in a Senate committee hearing can be considered perjury so that bureaucrats have to give straight forward answers instead of using verbal gymnastics to avoid giving an answer.
@@jonmccauley6490 lying to congress is already illegal. This is a form or perjury skirting the loophole. I thought democrats wanted to close loopholes. As long as they are able to plead the 5th, it would be fine. But wouldn’t it seem odd if they were asked “do you want to ban all guns” and they plead the fifth? Besides, democrats already prosecute those that tell the truth
That is true but if that person is UNable to "shoulder" the firearm to make accurate control, then use using an ARM brace that makes that weapon cannot be shouldered is now illegal?
@@Dragon4377 I don't think they care anymore, so who knows. From what they have published, merely having it on the firearm makes you a felon even for handicapped. Our government no longer protects disabled . . . or naturally born women in a restroom. Or children for that matter. Right is "wrong" and wrong is "right." Lord help us.
This is much ado about nothing. Brace or stock, who cares, the gun functions the same way. If you wanted to get in the weeds you could argue AR pistols are 'less' dangerous than full size AR's because of the ballistic difference with a round exiting the shorter barrel of a pistol over the longer barrel of a rifle. But since these retards don't know the difference between 5.56 and .300 Blackout, this would be a wasted conversation.
Yes, but it also changes the weapon classification. The rule is not about making the weapon and more or less safe, it’s about clear classification of weapon types. I don’t agree with the punishment, or failure to properly legislate, but I understand the thought process.
The only thing more frustrating than not letting someone speak is knowing that whatever they were _going_ to say would've just been a waste of time dodging the point anyway
these politicians and lawmakers are the ones who gave the ATF the go ahead to ban these things. you poor unintelligent American 🤣 just cause they're the ones barring the ATF from following the rules they set, doesn't make them the good guys
I can't help but keep watching this video...watching Dettelback squirm in his chair and not answer a single question Massie asked him is enlightening. For so many years "we the people" have been subjected to infringements placed upon us in regard to our 2A, and the ATF has been the ringleader to this blatant activity that fly in the face of the constitution. Let freedom ring!🗽
It looks like someone fluffed up their resume to get a job they are not at all qualified for, then realized he truly fucked up and is completely out of his element. He should have resigned immediately following that interaction.
Well-regulated militia is also part of that ever-so-sacred 2A, so let me see you fighting for gun regulation and militia registration in order to actually uphold your 2A
@@captaincripple7218 no other right in your constitution has the language "shall not be infringed", so by that reading, then all your other rights are infringible, and you're okay with that.
He is in charge of a bunch of dickless wonders that need to collect a tax payer payed paycheck in order to harass tax payers. To chickenshit to go arrest real criminals........Holy crap! They might shoot back. Go ahead pukes, keep screwing with men that just want to be left alone.
*NAILED IT. AT THE VERY BEGINNING HE SHOULD HAVE KEPT ON PRESSURING AND PRESSURING AND PRESSURING HIM... STOP TELLING ME TO RESUBMIT SOMETHING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED. I DON'T NEED TO RESUBMIT SOMETHING AGAIN BECAUSE YOU ALREADY APPROVED IT AND ME RESUBMITTING SOMETHING IS JUST ANOTHER REASON FOR YOU TO DENY IT.*
Nice that Massie asked about "Constructive intent" because they say 'you have to keep them separate'. otherwise they will come after you with a felony charge for constructive intent. But what defines "separate". in the same room? On the other side of the house? In a safety deposit box down at the bank? "Constructive Intent" is one of the biggest traps I've ever seen in my life.
@@mytoob1671 and goes to the "the ATF when the paintjob on my pistol upper, matches the paint on my rifle lower" meme, but in a more realistic sense. Having an AR pistol, and an AR rifle in the same safe could be considered "constructive intent".
you dont need to be a certified "firearms expert" to determine whether or not you can shoulder the firearm with just the buffer tube. the answer is : yes, you absolutely can shoulder it (literally pick one up, shoulder it and fire a round - boom, you just did it). and NO, the atf doesnt have ANY authority to re-classify because someone decides to use it improperly.
i can technically shoulder my fkn pistol.. lmfao place it against your shoulder, press the trigger. congrats, you just shouldered a pistol. now the atf is going to show up at 4 in the morning, mumble some words, kick your door open, shoot your dog and then shoot you bc you came down the stairs with a gun in your hand.
@@blshouse The term "certified expert" is an oxymoron. There is literally no such thing as being an "expert" in telling a pistol from a rifle. It is an appeal to authority to both obfuscate liability and ignore the question. If it takes a "certified expert" to tell a pistol from a rifle, then it is literally impossible to try to act like a normal citizen can have intent on the issue. A citizen can't "intend" to make an SBR out of a braced pistol if it takes a "certified expert" to tell one from the other.....
I love the way he totally “grilled” him. Asked a bunch of questions in a row without getting a single answer. Easiest examination for the witness-just don’t say anything. What a joke. Stop glorifying this type of investigation. This was a TERRIBLE cross examination.
This made me want to move to Kentucky. Massie is a rock star. That was probably one of the most incredible things I've seen when he pulled out that original brace to shove it down Dettledouche's throat. He sat there and lied all morning about that approval letter and how what was submitted was different than what was approved. Then Massie pulls out the original and asks him if it's exempt from the rule. Wonderful.
@@allabouttheU1662 He has no authority in Kentucky because we have a super majority in house and Senate. We just passed SAPA without Beshear’s approval which is excellent!
I bought my home here in Kentucky for $25,000 about 7 years ago, I've lived here my entire life. Some days I can sit on my front porch and may see a handful of cars, the entire day going down the road.. Love it here.
He knew he was getting grilled and STILL didn’t prepare for this. He signed off on a rule that should have no weight and he doesn’t have a clue on anything!!!
Their own website states “By law, federal agencies such as ATF must consult the public when creating, modifying, or deleting rules in the Code of Federal Regulations.” When was the public consulted on this change?
There was a notice of proposed rule making published and a time allotment for our responses. If you aren’t in circles which share this information or aren’t watching a particular webpage where notices are published you would miss it.
They did post the proposed rule change for public comment, which, I believe got an overwhelming majority of negative response which they ignored and did whatever they wanted anyway
Something like ~300,000 comments on the rule were submitted, with vast majority being overwhelmingly negative. The ATF didn't give a shit anyway and decided to go through with it.
'The rule was changed to clarify what was and wasnt allowed' 'No I dont know what and what isnt covered by the rule, and I wont tell you unless you submit it to the technical branch.' 'No we wont prosecute you just because you still have the brace as long as its not on the gun, unless we think you just took it off the gun when we came around to check. Unless we change the rule again.'
It's what they want. So they can prosecute selectively whenever they want. American government has shown how they treat well armed and organized citizens. It's desperate and despicable.
Did he seriously state that a gun owner would have to send in a pistol that has no attachment on the buffer tube so ATF could determine if it can be shouldered (after logging the model, serial #, probably firing a round for ballistic forensics, and tying that all to owner's personal info in their illegal database)? How is a judge or jury supposed to rule if they do prosecute, strictly on the "analysis" of whatever ATF examiner picks that one up? This is beyond ridiculous, but Massie does a good job highlighting that.
And what happens if it isn’t approved? Does the owner get charged with a felony for asking for clarification or do they just destroy your gun and make you pay for shipping?
I absolutely love the fact that the director of the atf sits there and says over and over he doesn't know. THE DIRECTOR OF THE ATF DOESN'T KNOW HOW THE F PART OF HIS ORGANIZATION WORKS!
Congress just needs to step in and pass a law stating that stabilizing braces are indeed legal and take it out of these filibusting unconstitutional lawyers from the ATF
Absolutely not! You actually want to give Congress the authority to dictate to you every item that is legal or illegal in your safe. Screw that. Kill this retarded rule, then kill 'all' the funding for the ATF, then disband the agency in total. That's the way you start to fix the 'problem'.
@@donewithmodernlife I researched the whole SBR shit show. It was inacted as a hunting regulation. It was supposed to keep people from opportunity poaching. People would take elk, deer, etc. by shooting from their car or truck window. People were desperate during the depression ( can't blame them I guess)
I am soooo sick and tired of these government officials and politicians playing verbal gymnastics and NOT answering a simple questions. It is insulting to the American people that they think that they can talk their ways around a question. Just answer the damn question. The contempt that these officials have for the citizenry is disturbing.
I love how there are no clear rules. In order to make something, we need to build it (which may be illegal) then send it to ATF with a bunch of money and they will tell us if it is legal. There isn't rules that make it clear as to what is and isn't legal.
"people are only felons if they intentionally violated the law" ...i thought it was a "rule".... never heard of this exemption before. Guess the atf director is a judge and jury niw too.
That’s a dam lie they absolutely will say you had intent to build an sbr if you just simply kept them separate….and he just tipped there hand by saying if a gun is submitted with just a buffer tube they will classify and you can bet they will say you can shoulder a buffer tube and thus now you will also need to register that
I love Massie. He legit asks solid questions - not the leading totally off topic crap you hear in hearings - because he knows firearms, he is a shooter and he cares. He even brought up Constructive Intent - something the ATF has used to nab people and Dettledump even said just take it off! There you have it, the ATF director said constructive intent isn't a thing.
Idk tbf the argument is pretty disingenuous. Everyone knows braces are shouldered and used as stocks. They just call them braces cause they have a little velcro strap on them. There's even braces with "cheek risers" on them. Tell me, why would a brace need a cheek raiser? Hmmm. Yeah, I doubt you can win legislation being disingenuous about the item in question.
@@ameliacrasman9955 not sure what you're trying to say in totality, but some PSBs have cheek risers because they were originally intended to be stabilized using a cheek weld without touching the shoulder and original rulings said that was acceptable, specifically referring to using a cheek weld. Others were designed specifically as arm braces with arm straps. Some designed with both uses in mind. Many vids were made prior to the shouldering ruling that discussed the cheek weld usage - specifically, Military Arms Channel and Mr.Gunsngear both made one.
I could watch videos like this all day long. It's great to know that we still have some good politicians in office that are fighting for our rights. I love watching this guy stuttering and sweating like a w#@*e in church.
"People are only felons if they intentionally violate the law." The law that the ATF made?? But only Congress can make laws, and Congress did not make a law making firearm braces illegal. He has no idea how he is making the case AGAINST HIS DEPARTMENT while he thinks he's being clever.
It’s criminal, this is insane. Not sure how it can be legal, and then someone gets a hair up there butt to go after law abiding citizens. It won’t stop here, if they get what they want it’s only the beginning.
ATF was able to do that because Congress let them (and other agencies) to make regulations as they see fit. Agencies are part of executive, they do not have any business making any law that they call regulations. All regulations are unconstitutional and should be declared null and void.
If congress weren't tyrants themselves, the BATFE wouldn't exist. But let me guess...you vote libertarian and run for office as a Libertarian to make sure a constitutional choice exists on every ballot, right? 😂😂😂😂
Saying "people are using the braces in ways we didn't anticipate" isn't how laws and regulations are supposed to work. This is a prime example of bureaucratic overreach and why our government has such low levels of approval. It's also very telling how the ATF repeatedly tries to evade direct, simple questions.
I love the ATF talking in circles. This is awesome! Thomas Massie for the people! Can anyone actually explain WHY a pistol brace is illegal? If anything I feel like this would hinder any able bodied shooter more than it would ever help... How this makes the weapon deadlier or more dangerous is confusing to me..
If ATF can’t explain the unconstitutional rule to congress,then why would he expect the average citizen to able comply? Absolutely insane!
its a mad world brother welcome to 2023
thats the way they want it
They don't care about constitutionality. Dettlebach is doing what "Moms Demand Action" want. That's why he's there.
Why would the average citizen have any interest or motivation to comply with this anyway. This is illegal BS by the ATF (nothing unusual for them), and no one should give it a moment's thought.
IGnOrAnCe oF tHe LaW iS nOt aN eXcUsE! 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Declaring a felony means it is a law but did not go through the legislative process required. Who gave the ATF the authority to create their own laws. If that ATF Director worked anywhere else other than a federal agency and refused to answer or did not have an answer to basic questions, they would be instantly fired. The lack of competency, honesty, and integrity within our government is unacceptable and needs to be changed.
which is why hardin v atf ruled against the ATF under lenity. when criminal punishment is invoked, and the wording is vague, deference is to the people, and not the state. and since the ATF has no statutory authority to craft law (nor can congress grant them such), and merely have authority to enforce passed laws from congress, they're getting reamed in court over this.
and well they should.
Donald Trump. ? Answered
Ask Trump. He gave them the authority with the implementation of the bump stock ban. BTW, that ruling has just be denutted, which should be good news for the brace ban.
Any gun owner who voted for Trump should not be bitiching about the ATF pistol brace ban, nor attacks on gun owners' due process. Wake up.
@@sideshow3136 Not totally.
While I agree under Trump where it had failed twice under Obama, Congress gives these agencies the legal right to create regulations with the laws that establish the agencies and set the boundaries for their creation of regulations. It's also the President who signs those laws.
After their establishment and the setting of boundaries, both Congress and the President (Trump in this case) are responsible for reining in these agencies. Trump and Congress failed to rein the ATF in.
When Trump had both the Senate and House in his first 2 years, little was achieved because the Republicans in Congress love to campaign on conservative issues but once they secure office, they generally refuse to follow through. Obamacare was never repealed, legislation to restrict the ATF was never passed, immigration was effectively ignored, etc.
Exactly!
Abolish the ATF
💯
💯💯💯
and do away with the NFA and GCA!
@@jwreagan and the HUGHES AMENDMENT from the FOPA
Without ATF...
The FBI would take over the ATF job.
FBI is used for more political hanky panky than any other agency.
Think about that one !
Apparently, if the ATF Director cannot testify without appealing to his "experts," than Congress needs to haul each and every "expert" the ATF has in and grill them. This is mere obfuscation.
Agency heads never permit underlings who have relevant knowledge of the facts to testify before Congress. Why? Because the truth would be disclosed and the agency's abuses of power would be undermined.
@@gaiustacitus4242 You're absolutely right. That's why it's up to Congress to make that decision. Surely Congress knows they're going to get obfuscation and lies by bringing agency heads in. For that reason, I'm skeptical of Congress's intentions as well. If they know they're not going to get answers, then surely these hearings are nothing but political theater.
there’s a reason they choose him to be the spokesman’s lol
Maybe he shouldn't be Director...? Did Congress grab him from the hallway and haul him in there without him having a chance to prepare?😅
I wonder how long he knew about this hearing before it occurred?
Yes but the experts will play the same game as the agency heads do because the agencies lawyers will advise them to and their boss will demand they do it because avoiding be truthful with congress is the goal
I've said this before ,, why the BS TALK,, the atf is breaking the law,,, DEFUND THE atf.........
I say yes 😄
Not defund, but eliminate. They shouldn’t exist.
...and take the FBI with them.
The supreme court needs to rule them unconstitutional.
Jail them
The worst part about this isn't the fact that he wouldn't directly answer questions... It's the fact that nothing will happen to him because he didn't.
Because like Pete Booty-gig he has no knowledge of the department he's running,
Sgt. Schultz, he knows nothing..nothing!
This
I don't think it's a matter of "wouldn't". It appears it's more of a matter of "couldn't". This guy is completely incompetent. The ATF does very little in the way of enforcing alcohol or tobacco regulations. Their primary focus is firearms and explosives, and this guy already admitted in another grilling that he is not a firearms expert. WTF? He knows very little about what he is enforcing. He's just another puppet yes-man for the globalist elites who are hellbent on destroying a free republic.
You are correct. It's an exercise of futility.
unfortunately its usually like that with any kind of testifying, or politics, everyone should be held to the same standard and no one should be exempt from the law, but many from the governent feel that because they work for some alphabet agency or for congress they are above the law.
The bureaucrats, who were NOT ELECTED, should not be allowed to decide what is legal or illegal. Having a pistol brace installed and used as intended should not be illegal, period!
Why are you getting so specific and aiding them in their efforts? Government as a whole has no business whatsoever digging into or attempting to regulate or restrict what guns I own. Period. 'All' this regulation, restriction, BS is illegal and unconstitutional.
Absolutely Mike
That's the problem with our government. Most laws are written by special interest groups, not elected officials. In fact, most politicians don't even know what's in the law/s that they're passing. It's a disgrace!
The very existence of the ATF is Unconstitutional. The entire Department should be disbanded, it's agents scattered to the four winds and blackballed from LE service for life, and the Executives of ATF should all be shipped off to Gitmo, awaiting trial for violating 18 U.S.C. 2381 and 18 U.S.C. 2384...
@@Mike-In-O-Town How am I aiding government?
It amazes me how far people can go without being held in contempt.
these politicians and lawmakers are the ones who gave the ATF the go ahead to ban these things. you poor unintelligent American 🤣 just cause they're the ones barring the ATF from following the rules they set, doesn't make them the good guys
I agree. Refusing to answer that many questions at a Congressional hearing is absurd.
that just shows the government doesn't fear the people. you don't answer, contempt. they don't answer, continuation of tyranny. good times
The atf is a rouge agency that's protected by the government. They can do whatever they want.
its not court, its congress. Its all for show they can simply not answer anything and then leave. That said, congress 'writes the checks' so to speak so most people comply "somewhat" in order to keep funded.
He's literally holding the brace they approved, and he still can't answer the question without talking around it.
@PocketDrummer Exactly!
I totally understand what you are saying. It is a complicated situation. Arm braces are never used as arm braces and people defacto shoulder the rifles. It you want an SBR just get a damn tax stamp it's $200 and I think the ATF is waiving the fee so people can legally keep their SBRs that were legal before. SBRs are not illegal. You just have to register them properly.
@@tmi1234567 how's that boot taste? 🤔 What part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" do you not understand?
@@tmi1234567 yet states that disallows NFA items screws over their citizens because they aren’t allowed to get tax stamps for their braces.
If you do end up registering the pistol as an SBR, then it becomes more restrictive to cross state lines with these firearms and harder to sell/transfer them in the future because of the NFA designation. It’s just another attempt at restricting legally acquired firearms.
@@tmi1234567 You are confused. Fun Fact: Unconstitutionality aside, did you know some citizens cannot get a "damn tax stamp?" Not that they should anyway, just saying.
So nice to see this actually being challenged directly. Shows just how insane and overreaching the ATF has gone.
just be nice if Massie said "SBRs in the NFA in 2023 is stupid"
ATF was able to do that because Congress let them (and other agencies) to make regulations as they see fit. Agencies are part of executive, they do not have any business making any law that they call regulations. It's unconstitutional and should be declared null and void.
The government*
Theatre Nothing changed
It's not being challenged directly until the courts or Congress tells them they can't engage in this sort of overreach. Anything else is just for show. This questioning is legally worthless to anyone facing charges pursuant to this rule change, except maybe if his testimony that you can separate them and it won't count as constructive is legally admissible.
If he can't say that the original braces are okay then he's lying out his ass and is proving everyone right about the ATF
They don't have the right to exist, let alone make laws or "rules"
Bullbutter spoken here 😮
2#
Hi they try to tr to hi y it é to to treaty
Idk wtf part of
“shall not be infringed” do they not compute,get,understand,or comprehend? I guess it’s the shall not be infringed all of it part.
Atf almost had a heart attack when he raised that brace 💀
The eyebrows 😂
😂😂😂😂
Anyone gonna talk about the fact that ATF testified to "No constructive possession" for the brace?
For some reason they are focused on "constructive configurations". On items which are by engineering, modular; this is an untenable and unenforceable platform to build the house of cards.
Or the house of raid crews.
The incompetency displayed by the ATF is embarrassing. They cannot retroactively make law abiding citizens felons!
They can't make laws at all, but they are dang sure trying to.
they can if we let them
"incompetence" is not the word you should be using.
he even couldn't mention the fact that its a loophole to classify a rifle as a pistol
Except they can, and they are, and people are letting them
Instant felony charge from ridiculous rules by the atf to restrict lawful gun ownership...these democrats will go to any lengths to get rid of lawful possession.
Also think about this, the Demonrats would also go to any lengths to eliminate millions of Republican voters because felons can’t vote!
time to deport the illegals....
Demonrats fify
Make the classification as clear as mud, this makes it easier for gungrabbers take a citizens firearm away and in turn makes the citizen have to jump thru expensive hoops to get it back, if at all. Well played Democrats, _there is now another special little room in Hell set aside especially for you._
And cry for the law breakers and robbers....while they spend taxpayer dollars on private security.....and I bet their guards carry all sorts of firearms....smh
Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution forbids Congress from passing any ex post facto laws that would retroactively make US citizens felons for actions that were previously legal. Instead, ATF bureaucrats who are not elected are enacting administrative laws that are making Americans ex post facto felons and sending them to prison for ten years.
Exactly, even if you somehow could convince me a brace is suddenly illegal it would only effect new made ones after the date of a ruling. Anything before that is exempt by basic legal logic.
@@tenofprime - Trump's ATF designated bump stocks to be machine guns, so they'll definitely have a go at that ex post facto felony over a stupid piece of plastic.
That'll be challenged in the Supreme Court and most definitely shot down which will open the ATF up to countless lawsuits which will most certainly drain their budget dry.👍😂
Blame the judges who allow this shit to continue.
@@jimgordon3206 the legislators are also to blame. They are the ones with the power to create laws, yet they will stand by and do nothing
Proud of our rep Massie will get my vote next time too
They DO NOT get to write their own laws. That is criminal. Hold them accountable
We the people need to. In our homes, in the streets, at their homes. Not one more gun law, or we take action that our fathers failed to take.
They don't write their own laws. This rule falls under the purview of the 1934 NFA. BATF is an executive authority tasked with enforcing this law. Part of that enforcement comes with interpreting the law itself, in the same way that a traffic cops needs to interpret reckless driving
When a whole bunch of people are using "braces" to turn their pistols something functionally identical to a short barreled rifle with an extra piece of velcro, it's only natural that the interpretation will be revised to cover braces as well as velco-free stocks. It's the same exact way the federal government handles research chemicals that aren't quite heroin, but do the same thing
Just call the cops on ATF agents. Say there are armed thugs at your house trying to break in.
@@iceman5117 shall not be infringed.
@@ArrakisHeir88 thought terminating cliches aren't arguments. What shall not be infringed? A piece of plastic isn't an "arm." Even banning all semiautomatic weapons isn't banning "arms" since you can still own repeating weapons, blades and blunt instruments
Thomas Massie is quickly earning my respect and admiration.
I'm lucky enough to get to vote for him in KY's 4th district. Never before have I agreed 99% of the time with an official that directly represents me
then you just started paying attention. Which is great, but Massie has been doing this a decade. And is vocal about 9/11 lies as well. "28 pages/ Massie" is a great way to spend a bit of time on TH-cam.
If he proposes legislation to overturn the laws ATF is enforcing, then I will respect him.
@@TannerSwizel I am in KY 4th District too!!
Massie is the man
Not mentioned enough is that ATF is "waiving" the $200 tax stamp for an SBR. ATF has no authority to waive a tax imposed by Congress. The whole business sucks and ATF is facing 4 different lawsuits over various issues with it. All four of them should succeed on the merits.
Aside from the fact that doing so is double taxation. Pistols get taxed by the feds, the manufacturer pays this tax, and more severe restrictions are placed on their purchase, waiting periods, etc.
By reclassifying these pistols as SBRs, once the grace period is over, they got the taxes on the pistol from the manufacturer, and now they get opposite taxes taken out for it being an SBR.
Really this is about illegal compulsory registration.
Shit! I didn't think of that! OMG thats not like me... I learned something new to hate about this whole "Rule"
Some states don't allow registration of sbrs.
But the real F¥€|{ YOU is in a lot of states; you can carry a pistol in your car with you. With all the Democrat/globalist
endorsed riots going on, people might want an AR15 pistol to help them GET HOME!
What chaps my azz is that no judge has issued a TRO for it yet to protect the millions of gun owners who don't have any idea this is even occurring.
@@blenke1 Yes - - a new way to obtain compulsory registration. Communist leaning, more and more.
ATF: The original brace was the only one we approved and people started making ones that weren’t that one.
Congress: We’ll I have that one original one so this original is approved by what you just said?
ATF: I don’t know.
Nothing like an ongoing effort to make law abiding citizens felons.
You cant be a felon if theres no law to prosecute you with. Its a made up rule that the ATF is trying to enforce when they have no legal authority to make laws out of thin air.
Creating a 2nd class citizens.
Just trying to take guns. Next is semi auto firearms you’ll need to register
you WoN'T be PROseCutED. thIs is TO CATCh THE CarteLS
Hot take: it is free to register all your form 1 SBRs atm. Just register them.
The guy being questioned needs to look in the dictionary and find “infringement”. What a buffoon!
Steven Dettelbach - Director of the ATF. Complete a$$clown.
Memnarch 1170:
Not a buffoon. A buffoon does not always have evil intent.....
You're expecting A LOT out of a man who openly claimed in front of congress that he's "Not a firearms expert" despite being posted to the position of Director of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and FIREARMS and continually refuses to define an "Assault Weapon" claiming that's the job of congress (Pure Irony in that statement alone)
"I submit you don't have that authority and you don't have the authority to do what you did." Rep. Massie sums up the existence of the ATF in one sentence.
There needs to be a some kind of penalty put in place for not answering yes or no questions as a yes or no. A judge can order a person to answer a question or be held in contempt… same needs to happen here. “Being held before congress” doesn’t hold weight anymore, it’s looked at as a processional event by these people.. going through the motions
Agreed
i'm pretty sure you CAN be held in contempt of congress, that was one of the thing mcarthy used when going after communists. he would ask "are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party" if you said yes you were arrested, if you said "no" and he thought you were lying you would be arrested for perjury, if you refused to answer you would be held in contempt (apparently you can't plead the 5th i guess)
least that's how i had heard it.
@@tuseroni6085 but that was about SEVENTY years ago… that is not at all how congress operates anymore.
@@noreastsportsman6499 no reason it can't be done still, its just a matter of will
Wow, just wow... first Diddleshit says all people have to do to be legal is slide the brace off - then Massie asks if the pistol in the photo with the brace slid off is legal and Diddleshit can't give a yes or no... Need to completely defund ATF. They are dangerously clueless.
Exactly 💯%!
He started to say that the piece of plastic isn't illegal, but stopped himself. LOL
There is a major difference between being clueless or having an agenda. The ATF is not clueless.
Forget defunding, needs abolished
ATF thinks they're entitled to do whatever they want and when directly asked they're vague and lack ANY accountability. Case by case basis in this regard is bs, they don't want to provide anything tangible so they can pass the rule and every case without exception will be a violation according to them, such a sham.
Yep ATF & FBI got away with murdering 78 civilians in WACO, p
People can do breaking bad moments and steal from them, but they can’t be held accountable?
Who do you think steals their goodies that they confiscate from gun owners?
So banning a device that is defacto not being used as intended with people shouldering the firearm is bad? I think people are failing to realize that SBRs aren't illegal. They only need to be registered. A registration process that is free currently if they are form 1. The reason why they are reclassified is because people are not using "arm braces" as arm braces. They are shouldering the firearm and using it as a stock.
If you want an SBR, just spend the $200 go get it registered, slap a real stock on there, and not worry about any of this.
@@tmi1234567 what about poor ppl? 200$ can make it break less fortunate Americans. So because they are poor they're denied the rights?
_"Case by case basis in this regard is bs"_
The worst part of that is, the default for the ATF is GUILTY. The default is SEIZURE of the potentally illegal gun, and _MAYBE_ we'll give it back in eight years, after you've spent $40,000 to your attorney.
We don’t follow RULES, WE follow laws legally passed by Congress!!
As the old saying goes "Rules were meant to be broken." Laws are not. Rules can't carry criminal penalties, period. Laws carry criminal penalties.
Problem is these Firearms laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. I don't know who they're going to get to enforce them cuz I damn sure won't
When I think of rules, I think of Pick up the toilet seat and put it back when done. Turn the light off when you leave the room. Failure is punishable by and ass chewing. Not 10 years in prison and 250K in fines.✌
Speak for yourself.
We should just follow the constitution period
He literally won’t say what the law/rule/whatever that can get you 10 years says. Appalling.
The rule is made to classify law abiding citizens as felons and give the ATF the 'right' to raid private homes and confiscate legal private property.
yeah i don't see that going down too well for them but they are welcome to try
They've been doing that for several decades now. It's just only now effecting you...
Unless they have probable cause, they can’t just raid your house. I know they do, but every time it’s taken to trial, they ATF loses. Most people just plead guilty to these charges, but if you take it to trial, you’ll never lose because people understand the ATF can’t just make laws.
@@madman026hey will just do it when you aren’t home, most people work, take their kids to school, etc. it wouldn’t be hard for them to figure out your schedule and then serve you the warrant when you are say, at the office, when most people aren’t armed. Then they simply escort you home in handcuffs to collect your shit.
Most arrest warrants are served on people outside of their homes if possible for this very reason. They know they have a greater likelihood of you complying when you aren’t barricaded in your house where you have the upper hand and know the layout.
Yeah ATF’s track record on cases that actually go to trial is abysmal. They just lost the bump stock case & they’re going to lose this case too. Congress has turned a blind eye to the ATF for decades & it’s long overdue for them to get their comeuppance.
So the real question is now that congress has gotten together twice on this brace subject what will happen? Will they punish the ATF and nullify the unconstitutional rule, or do nothing to protect the law abiding citizens from this infringement and overreach.
They'll do nothing
What do you think?
It's not the legislative branches job. It's the judicial branch...
Congress has oversight on the executive branch agencies they set up by law. ATF was created by and foes answer to Congress. They can remove it from existence. However, that bill goes through the usual process. Therefore, the democrats are the ones stopping this. They take zero interest in the merits of the complaints. They want to use the ATF to enact gun control. GOP can't do anything.
I don't know how many care in the broader GOP assembly in D.C., but Massie cares a lot. There are several very pro-Constitution people in right now. They could apply the pressure to achieve it if A) GOP had a veto-proof majority or B) Dems had anyone who gave a damn and wanted to steer the party.
It’s all theater.
Usually, when someone stumbles over their words it's a sign that they are going to be caught in their lie.
its just hard to argue something so stupid when its clear the intent is overreaching authoritarian rulemaking. This will go unresolved until someone or several americans get prosecuted then the SCOTUS gets involved and tosses it out just like the bump stock. Bump stocks are novelty items, so is this floppy stock/brace. Al the least, we need to remove SBRs from the registry and move on to suppressors. I want to see the repeal of the 1934 NFA. Full auto friday for everyone.
Good luck trying to explain when you are interrupted continually by a loud, argumentative examiner.
Just came here to let y'all know, this was just a show and no laws have changed.
@@evelynwaugh4053 The guy would not answer the questions and continued to just babble. Massie wasn't having it. They were all very simple yes or no answers that anyone with any understanding of braces could have answered. But when you have no legal, moral, or logical ground to stand on you can't answer those questions. If the guy actually wanted to answer those questions he could have. Also, the ATF wants people to send them their weapons so they can determine if they are illegal or not.? That's a one way ticket and you will never see your gun again. What a trap. And on top of that the guy lied about about everything being legal if you just take the brace off. There is a whole confusing list of parameters like the type of buffer tube, sights, optics, length of pull, barrel length, pistol grips and so on that could still allow the ATF to prosecute someone.
@gwn "thank you congressman for allowing me to answer this question"
Glad they're bringing up "constructive intent" when it comes to having the brace off of the pistol. It's going to become much more important further down the road on this. It goes to the "The ATF when the paintjob on my pistol upper, matches the paintjob on my rifle lower" meme, but in a more realistic sense. The ATF could in the same logic could call having those two firearms in the same safe "constructive intent".
“Before they’re felons” I spit my coffee up good job Massie
Here's the thing doesn't that violate the prohibition on ex post facto laws making something illegal after it may have occurred?
That line was a lie though, the grace period isn't going to immediately make people felons, that was the director's point. You have to prove *criminal intent* for it to be a felony, which means proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the person's intention was to violate the law. If you didn't mean to break any laws, its literally not a crime. You do NOT have to prove you didn't mean to commit a crime either, the prosecution must *prove* you did intend to commit a crime.
@@Veretax The criminal intent qualification already covers that. If it was legal when you did it, then it is literally impossible to prove criminal intent.
@InvictusByzantium do you realize how easy it is to say they intended to violate the law?
@@P010010010100101 Extremely easy to *say,* but its actually exceedingly difficult to *prove* in court, because that's what they have to do. Prove, not say.
back in, i don’t know, fourth grade, we learned about the branches of government. one of the things I remember was when my teacher said, “the executive branch can’t make laws.” I think the ATF should talk to my fourth grade teacher.
Guess you didn’t learn about corruption
@Solar General ahhhhhh, so clever of you. Ignoring the actual facts for an ad hominem. Maybe read a book?
@Solar General ok zoomer
Careful relying on teachers to accurately portray things. I remember learning that the job of SCOTUS was to interpret the Constitution.... which clearly isn't the case.
Your 4th grade Prussian-model bureaucrat confused the hell out of you and ~330,000,000 other people
How is this person in charge of anything other than a lemonade stand ?
You can thank Joe Biden. This is his pick.
No kidding.
Lemonade stand?? Your giving him too much credit
@@James-wy6py true. Imagine getting an answer from this F.A.T. agent when you ask if the lemonade contains fluoridated water? ~"Well... fluoride has been proven to be good for your teeth but we don't add fluoride to the lemonade and the water we get [from the tap] does not contain vulgar fluoride." ... excludes the two types of fluoride compounds that ARE added. I wouldn't want lemonade from this sorceror.
He said we wrote the rules!? I thought the ATF was supposed to enforce the rules
The “Director” of these executive agencies should know some of these things before appearing before Congress. Shocking how nobody from this administration seems to know how to answer ANYTHING they are asked.
I might argue he knows exactly what he is being asked, what the rules are and is dancing around the questions based on how he wants to be heard. Which in my opinion is even more disturbing. He knows exactly what the ATF is doing and why it is doing it. He just cant say it out loud.
@@GeoffHellings Agreed.
At the very end he says, "The piece of plastic, in and of itself, does not..." like he was saying that just having a pistol brace isn't a violation. Well, the recent Auto Key Card case verdict would beg to differ. In that case, they judged the *intention* of what the metal card with a drawing on it would be used for. Not the actual use. So the AFT is speaking out of both sides of their mouth.
Underrated comment
Nailed it.
You spelled “asshole” wrong
That is one of the strongest points I have heard to date. Also does having a silencer not attached to a firearm without a tax stamp still make you a felon?
@@Texasfishingfamily yes because you did not pay the government their extortion money for the privilege to own it
This guy knows nothing about the subject matter that can put you away for 10 years. If this doesn't scare you, you're nuts
He knows, hes just trying to do the classic dance around the said question and give the answer to the question he wanted to hear.
@magic1wizard Call the ATF multiple and ask them them the same question everytime. You will get multiple different answers with most of them being wrong. He doesn't know shit about it.
It's much worse than that; he knows enough to know that it's BS and also knows that nothing will happen to him for doing it. If he didn't have immunity he would not be changing laws and rules willy nilly like this.
@@terpsurfer7221 O like the SBA and other gov. entities, you can call and speak w/ 10 diff, people and get 10 diff. answers.
So telling when a person refuses to answer questions.
Imagine if agencies put this much effort into helping people
Well, they are! hence the billions sent overseas to Gay Ukraine. Democracy!!
@@desert4seat The men in southern Ukraine are not fighting to save their country.
They are business as usual - - and claim to be relatively unaffected.
Just like Syria - - men of fighting age left for Europe. They did not fight for their country.
"People are only felons if they intentionally violate the law." See how far that carries you in Federal Court. 2:33
Is there an advantage for an able-bodied shooter to shoulder a pistol brace designed for handicap shooters? Form 4 tax stamps are about $200 anyways, only way you can't afford $200 is if you don't have a job.
@@ddums89 If I change the front grill on my 2010 Jeep it becomes individual to me. Highly stylish with better airflow function than the original. The DMV one day decides that it is dangerous and unsafe (unusual) and I must remove it under penalty of law OR pay $200 and it automatically becomes safe again, not dangerous or even unusual. Why? Because it is after June 1,2023 that's why.
"... Shall not be infringed".
@@Betterifitsfree Ok not a great analogy there, how would a grill on a jeep better help a handicap driver or passanger? I think a better one you could use is if you installed a wheelchair lift, or a mobility trailer on the back.
Also bad analogy because I do not know of any pistol braces that are more comfortable than a buttstock.
I didn't intentionally buy that cocaine
@@ddums89 And have to submit a Form 20 to the ATF to ask for permission to take it out of the state, which takes weeks to get approved? How about no.
I’ve heard the line “I’ll have to get back to you on that” or something similar from every department or agency head in this administration. My response to all of them would be “Do you own a cellphone?” Make a call and get me the info NOW. None of this “I’ll get back to you” crap.
Yea like guck face Fauci
Imagine if you bullshitted at work like this when asked a question. How long would you have a job?
@@klj2382 I've said "I'll get back to you" pretty often in my job. Not fired yet. How many people does this guy leqd? You expect him to know by heart everything the ATF does? He's responsible for it, don't get me wrong, that's part of his job. But "how many people have registered braces?" if I get asked that question, I'd reach out to my team, get them to pull the list of all items classified as braces and then they'll check how many are classified for each. That's a few hours to days not a 2 min call.
Feel free to not agree with the guy, but try to not be an idiot while you are
Hell No, just trying to take the weapons.
“They can just detach them and keep them apart”
Does he hear himself?
ATF has literally gotten people under "intent to" for people having the right sized oil filter in their garage. They would definitely nail you for owning both parts.
@@mr44mag and if they tried he just gave every lawyer a wonderful argument from the horses mouth that there was no intent.
We can trust the ATF to not change their mind. 😂
@@mr44mag Yeah, werent' all those auto lock key things prosecuted successfully with lengthy jailtimes even though they weren't installed?
@@gianni_schicchi 45 and 110 years if I remember correctly. Even though witnesses testified you had to machine the part with some knowledge of gunsmithing, and they still either didn't work, or worked poorly. It was a joke item, but they got more jailtime than drug dealers and killers for something that skilled individuals have trouble making work with professional tools.
This government is a joke.
The problem is that the rule is a relic from an earlier version of the NFA that was later removed, but the SBR rule was not removed. The correct course of action would be to remove SBR classifications from the NFA.
That's the real kicker. One of the original intents of the NFA was to prohibit pistols. They added the SBR/SBS rules to prevent people from claiming that their otherwise banned pistols are infact rifles or shotguns. When the pistol prohibition was removed from the draft, the SBR/SBS rule wasn't, leaving us with this frankly stupid vestigial law.
The correct course of action would really be to repeal the NFA in it's entirety.
Thst would be the simplest way to do it remove short bbl rifles from the nfa
OR... hear me out... we just get rid of the NFA... defund and disband the ATF... we have all the records destroyed if they have been put into any form of searchable database, prosecute anyone who was making the database (or just make all their information available through a simple FOIA request... (then the snitches can look over their shoulders, and worry if someone may kick in their door... fun to turn the tables)
@@TheVillainInGlasses based
Should’ve asked him at the end “does anyone *other than congress* have the authority to reclassify this weapon because it can be shouldered?” The ATF guy keeps falling back on the “firearms experts” but that has no leverage or legitimacy because even said experts don’t have the authority to reclassify. It doesn’t matter what they think, we are not a country run by a panel of “experts,” we are run by representatives who swore an oath to uphold our constitution and all the rights entailed within it.
Unfortunately, the second amendment isn't just a short amendment to the left. You have to understand that they lie to themselves so much that their idea is their reality.
How it should be. That's not how it is now.
This bureaucrat has already admitted in hearings that he is not a Firearms expert, an alcohol expert or an explosives expert. He's a prosecutor.
Ever since nuclear proliferation of the 1950s "the experts" deemed it necessary that we become world run by panels of "experts" they just weren't supposed to make it so goddamm obvious.
Are these the same experts that say shit like an AR 15 round can blow a torso apart? Or call it fully semi automatic fore
Q: How to fix this problem? A: Abolish the ATF. There is no reason for that organization to exist, or firearm problems that states cant handle themself. #AbolishTheATF #DefundTheATF
It's a 10 year prison sentence for avoiding $200 tax. Wesley Snipes spent 2 years for evading millions of dollars.
Absurd isn't it....
Rules for thee but not for me!
Ladies and Gentlemen.. YOUR taxes paid these monsters to make YOU felons.
87,000 Armed IRS LEOs
10 years in prison for a peice of plastic.
Massie makes a great point here at the end. If the firearm can be reclassified simply because people are misusing the brace to shoulder the weapon, ANY AR pistol with or without the brace can be reclassified as an SBR because shooters are shouldering the buffer tube.
And there's the goal...
It's almost as if that's the point or something
@@Siphus Almost LoL... ; 0)
Reason y a butter knife should b regulated. Sure, it's "intended" to butter bread buuuut...
Well lets flip that, shall we? What is the actual difference between the AR pistol in question and an AR-15 being fired with one hand from an unshouldered position? An AR Pistol chambered in 5.56mm should count as a rifle. Unless you're specifically talking about the 9mm and other pistol caliber variants, there's a lot of room to say that is literally just a rifle without the stock.
In the private sector, when you fail to answer questions from the person who signs your pay check, you likely get fired. ATF director should also be fired for the same action.
Congress is not his boss. His boss is Biden. The ATF can make rules but are unenforceable because they aren't laws.
It was infuriating when the director started 'explaining' his answers to "Does this make the gun fire more rapidly?", etc. I was almost yelling at my screen "Yes or no?!?"
Congress should make a law stating that repeated non answers in a Senate committee hearing can be considered perjury so that bureaucrats have to give straight forward answers instead of using verbal gymnastics to avoid giving an answer.
Always be careful about punishing speech as it could backfire on you.
I know it’s frustrating, but think for a second about the precedent set by forcing speech.
@@jonmccauley6490 he is not asking to punish speech he would want to punish the lack there of
@@jonmccauley6490 lying to congress is already illegal. This is a form or perjury skirting the loophole. I thought democrats wanted to close loopholes.
As long as they are able to plead the 5th, it would be fine.
But wouldn’t it seem odd if they were asked “do you want to ban all guns” and they plead the fifth?
Besides, democrats already prosecute those that tell the truth
@Jon McCauley I think a yes/no question merits a yes or no response. They can explain after they say yes or no
What a joke... Who hires these people?
Criminals who don't want you having the ability to defend yourself so they can rob you blind.
Unfortunately the same ones that put biden in the presidency
The jokes are hired by the clowns that tell them.
Being able to shoulder a firearm makes it more accurate and hence makes it less likely to hit an unintended target.
Who said this government cares about that?
That is true but if that person is UNable to "shoulder" the firearm to make accurate control, then use using an ARM brace that makes that weapon cannot be shouldered is now illegal?
@@Dragon4377 I don't think they care anymore, so who knows. From what they have published, merely having it on the firearm makes you a felon even for handicapped.
Our government no longer protects disabled . . . or naturally born women in a restroom. Or children for that matter. Right is "wrong" and wrong is "right."
Lord help us.
This is much ado about nothing. Brace or stock, who cares, the gun functions the same way. If you wanted to get in the weeds you could argue AR pistols are 'less' dangerous than full size AR's because of the ballistic difference with a round exiting the shorter barrel of a pistol over the longer barrel of a rifle. But since these retards don't know the difference between 5.56 and .300 Blackout, this would be a wasted conversation.
Yes, but it also changes the weapon classification. The rule is not about making the weapon and more or less safe, it’s about clear classification of weapon types. I don’t agree with the punishment, or failure to properly legislate, but I understand the thought process.
People talking about how the ATF can't explain why this and why that when he can't even speak without getting cut off 5 words in a sentence.
The only thing more frustrating than not letting someone speak is knowing that whatever they were _going_ to say would've just been a waste of time dodging the point anyway
the question askers have very limited time each
@@BusinessWolf1
They're really simple questions that could have been answered with equal to or less than the number of syllables you just used.
Well like you said, they guy was just dodging and deflecting anyway and couldn't answer ANY of the questions
these politicians and lawmakers are the ones who gave the ATF the go ahead to ban these things. you poor unintelligent American 🤣 just cause they're the ones barring the ATF from following the rules they set, doesn't make them the good guys
I can't help but keep watching this video...watching Dettelback squirm in his chair and not answer a single question Massie asked him is enlightening. For so many years "we the people" have been subjected to infringements placed upon us in regard to our 2A, and the ATF has been the ringleader to this blatant activity that fly in the face of the constitution. Let freedom ring!🗽
It looks like someone fluffed up their resume to get a job they are not at all qualified for, then realized he truly fucked up and is completely out of his element. He should have resigned immediately following that interaction.
Well-regulated militia is also part of that ever-so-sacred 2A, so let me see you fighting for gun regulation and militia registration in order to actually uphold your 2A
@@BusinessSkrub The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed!
@@captaincripple7218 no other right in your constitution has the language "shall not be infringed", so by that reading, then all your other rights are infringible, and you're okay with that.
Why would anyone fight for militia registration or further regulations on firearms? Why would anyone want to give the government that power?
"I can't answer your questions directly because I'm just following orders like a good little Party member."
He is in charge of a bunch of dickless wonders that need to collect a tax payer
payed paycheck in order to harass tax payers. To chickenshit to go arrest real criminals........Holy crap! They might shoot back.
Go ahead pukes, keep screwing with men that just want to be left alone.
*NAILED IT. AT THE VERY BEGINNING HE SHOULD HAVE KEPT ON PRESSURING AND PRESSURING AND PRESSURING HIM... STOP TELLING ME TO RESUBMIT SOMETHING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED. I DON'T NEED TO RESUBMIT SOMETHING AGAIN BECAUSE YOU ALREADY APPROVED IT AND ME RESUBMITTING SOMETHING IS JUST ANOTHER REASON FOR YOU TO DENY IT.*
I love that he asked what I was thinking. “Can you shoulder the buffer tube”?
Nice that Massie asked about "Constructive intent" because they say 'you have to keep them separate'. otherwise they will come after you with a felony charge for constructive intent. But what defines "separate". in the same room? On the other side of the house? In a safety deposit box down at the bank?
"Constructive Intent" is one of the biggest traps I've ever seen in my life.
Constructive Intent is going to be HUGE with this rule. I definitely expect folks who remove their braces, but keep them will be prosecuted.
@@mytoob1671 and goes to the "the ATF when the paintjob on my pistol upper, matches the paint on my rifle lower" meme, but in a more realistic sense. Having an AR pistol, and an AR rifle in the same safe could be considered "constructive intent".
you dont need to be a certified "firearms expert" to determine whether or not you can shoulder the firearm with just the buffer tube. the answer is : yes, you absolutely can shoulder it (literally pick one up, shoulder it and fire a round - boom, you just did it). and NO, the atf doesnt have ANY authority to re-classify because someone decides to use it improperly.
i can technically shoulder my fkn pistol.. lmfao place it against your shoulder, press the trigger. congrats, you just shouldered a pistol. now the atf is going to show up at 4 in the morning, mumble some words, kick your door open, shoot your dog and then shoot you bc you came down the stairs with a gun in your hand.
'If' ATF can succeed on this brace rule, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll be back for AR pistols themselves next. Just a piece at a time....
Claiming it takes a "certified expert" is only so they can selectively prosecute/persecute whomever they wish.
@@blshouse The term "certified expert" is an oxymoron. There is literally no such thing as being an "expert" in telling a pistol from a rifle. It is an appeal to authority to both obfuscate liability and ignore the question. If it takes a "certified expert" to tell a pistol from a rifle, then it is literally impossible to try to act like a normal citizen can have intent on the issue. A citizen can't "intend" to make an SBR out of a braced pistol if it takes a "certified expert" to tell one from the other.....
I love the way he totally “grilled” him. Asked a bunch of questions in a row without getting a single answer. Easiest examination for the witness-just don’t say anything. What a joke. Stop glorifying this type of investigation. This was a TERRIBLE cross examination.
This made me want to move to Kentucky. Massie is a rock star. That was probably one of the most incredible things I've seen when he pulled out that original brace to shove it down Dettledouche's throat. He sat there and lied all morning about that approval letter and how what was submitted was different than what was approved. Then Massie pulls out the original and asks him if it's exempt from the rule. Wonderful.
Just wish Massie would have also had a current brace to hold up next to the original to show everyone there truly is no difference.
Yes but Kentucky's governor is doing his best to make living in Kentucky truly svck
@@allabouttheU1662 That sucks!
@@allabouttheU1662 He has no authority in Kentucky because we have a super majority in house and Senate. We just passed SAPA without Beshear’s approval which is excellent!
I bought my home here in Kentucky for $25,000 about 7 years ago, I've lived here my entire life. Some days I can sit on my front porch and may see a handful of cars, the entire day going down the road..
Love it here.
Short barrel rifle, that term is a laughing stock across the world. “Only felons” if we don’t jump and ask how high?
Law abiding gun owner - somebody the government hasn't figured out how to call a felon....yet
"People are only felons if they intentionally violate the law." Really? I think a lot of people are in jail for unintentional acts.
REPRESENTATIVE MASSIE IS TEARING IT UP! God bless the American spirit, still lives in old Kentucky! 🇺🇸
He knew he was getting grilled and STILL didn’t prepare for this. He signed off on a rule that should have no weight and he doesn’t have a clue on anything!!!
Their own website states “By law, federal agencies such as ATF must consult the public when creating, modifying, or deleting rules in the Code of Federal Regulations.”
When was the public consulted on this change?
There was a notice of proposed rule making published and a time allotment for our responses. If you aren’t in circles which share this information or aren’t watching a particular webpage where notices are published you would miss it.
They did post the proposed rule change for public comment, which, I believe got an overwhelming majority of negative response which they ignored and did whatever they wanted anyway
I mean they did consult the public, but it was akin to someone saying: "So what do you think? Oh is that what you think? Yeah I don't really care."
Something like ~300,000 comments on the rule were submitted, with vast majority being overwhelmingly negative. The ATF didn't give a shit anyway and decided to go through with it.
Out voted by bots would be my guess since it's not an "official voting system"
But then again what's that matter to them anyhow
'The rule was changed to clarify what was and wasnt allowed'
'No I dont know what and what isnt covered by the rule, and I wont tell you unless you submit it to the technical branch.'
'No we wont prosecute you just because you still have the brace as long as its not on the gun, unless we think you just took it off the gun when we came around to check. Unless we change the rule again.'
It's what they want. So they can prosecute selectively whenever they want. American government has shown how they treat well armed and organized citizens. It's desperate and despicable.
Exactly
Mp dane Lloyd thank you sir you speak the truth... Thanks for picking up for the honest people!!!❤
Did he seriously state that a gun owner would have to send in a pistol that has no attachment on the buffer tube so ATF could determine if it can be shouldered (after logging the model, serial #, probably firing a round for ballistic forensics, and tying that all to owner's personal info in their illegal database)? How is a judge or jury supposed to rule if they do prosecute, strictly on the "analysis" of whatever ATF examiner picks that one up? This is beyond ridiculous, but Massie does a good job highlighting that.
Juries are supposed to take their word for it. Because you are guilty if and when they decide that you are.
And what happens if it isn’t approved? Does the owner get charged with a felony for asking for clarification or do they just destroy your gun and make you pay for shipping?
I absolutely love the fact that the director of the atf sits there and says over and over he doesn't know.
THE DIRECTOR OF THE ATF DOESN'T KNOW HOW THE F PART OF HIS ORGANIZATION WORKS!
"people are only felons if they knowingly violate the law" is NOT how our legal system works.
It's called "Control"
Why is the Director permitted to Lie and not be held accountable! He makes laws, without the judicial system!
Because he is a democrat
@@robertdistasio6715It won't matter if he is Democrats or Republicans. He's part of Deep State.
9mm pistol can blow the lungs out of you and leave a 12 inch exit wound.
some politician with no accountability
@@JS-rv3et Riiiggghhht....
@@TLM-Nathan their words not minr
Congress just needs to step in and pass a law stating that stabilizing braces are indeed legal and take it out of these filibusting unconstitutional lawyers from the ATF
No they need to remove sbr’s & sbs’s from the NFA. They never should’ve been included in the first place.
Absolutely not! You actually want to give Congress the authority to dictate to you every item that is legal or illegal in your safe. Screw that. Kill this retarded rule, then kill 'all' the funding for the ATF, then disband the agency in total. That's the way you start to fix the 'problem'.
@@donewithmodernlife I researched the whole SBR shit show.
It was inacted as a hunting regulation.
It was supposed to keep people from opportunity poaching. People would take elk, deer, etc. by shooting from their car or truck window. People were desperate during the depression ( can't blame them I guess)
They need to push forward a bill defunding and dismantling the ATF.
biden won't sign
I am soooo sick and tired of these government officials and politicians playing verbal gymnastics and NOT answering a simple questions. It is insulting to the American people that they think that they can talk their ways around a question. Just answer the damn question. The contempt that these officials have for the citizenry is disturbing.
That’s our wonderful government who “serves the people” and we’re supposed to trust 😂
Massie is probably the only House member I don't completely loathe. Anyways the ATF must be abolished and the NFA repealed.
Well done, Representative Massie.
I love how there are no clear rules. In order to make something, we need to build it (which may be illegal) then send it to ATF with a bunch of money and they will tell us if it is legal. There isn't rules that make it clear as to what is and isn't legal.
"people are only felons if they intentionally violated the law" ...i thought it was a "rule".... never heard of this exemption before. Guess the atf director is a judge and jury niw too.
Jesus Christ. He couldn’t answer a single question.
That’s a dam lie they absolutely will say you had intent to build an sbr if you just simply kept them separate….and he just tipped there hand by saying if a gun is submitted with just a buffer tube they will classify and you can bet they will say you can shoulder a buffer tube and thus now you will also need to register that
I noticed that too
Massie is a treasure. It's clear he also knows firearms well
As usual, Congressman Massie is on fire, spot on.
I think the ATF budget should be "reclassified" to $0.
I love Massie. He legit asks solid questions - not the leading totally off topic crap you hear in hearings - because he knows firearms, he is a shooter and he cares.
He even brought up Constructive Intent - something the ATF has used to nab people and Dettledump even said just take it off! There you have it, the ATF director said constructive intent isn't a thing.
He lied
Idk tbf the argument is pretty disingenuous. Everyone knows braces are shouldered and used as stocks. They just call them braces cause they have a little velcro strap on them. There's even braces with "cheek risers" on them. Tell me, why would a brace need a cheek raiser? Hmmm. Yeah, I doubt you can win legislation being disingenuous about the item in question.
@@ameliacrasman9955 not sure what you're trying to say in totality, but some PSBs have cheek risers because they were originally intended to be stabilized using a cheek weld without touching the shoulder and original rulings said that was acceptable, specifically referring to using a cheek weld.
Others were designed specifically as arm braces with arm straps.
Some designed with both uses in mind.
Many vids were made prior to the shouldering ruling that discussed the cheek weld usage - specifically, Military Arms Channel and Mr.Gunsngear both made one.
I like how Rep. Thomas asked about constructive intent because we all know how the AFT plays.
Go go get em get em....ugh ugh!
I could watch videos like this all day long. It's great to know that we still have some good politicians in office that are fighting for our rights. I love watching this guy stuttering and sweating like a w#@*e in church.
Massie is a true American Patriot.
"People are only felons if they intentionally violate the law." The law that the ATF made?? But only Congress can make laws, and Congress did not make a law making firearm braces illegal. He has no idea how he is making the case AGAINST HIS DEPARTMENT while he thinks he's being clever.
defund the ATF, why are were even spending money on this?
It’s criminal, this is insane. Not sure how it can be legal, and then someone gets a hair up there butt to go after law abiding citizens. It won’t stop here, if they get what they want it’s only the beginning.
I know they're going to take guns away. 😢
@@Legio1Italica Not if we refuse to comply. It should be every American's line in the sand.
Congress needs to step in and tell the ATF what they can and can not do.
That is the reason we are at this point. _YOU_ need to tell _your_ government, all branches, what _they_ can and cannot do.
ATF was able to do that because Congress let them (and other agencies) to make regulations as they see fit. Agencies are part of executive, they do not have any business making any law that they call regulations. All regulations are unconstitutional and should be declared null and void.
Nah, 1776 needs to commence again. Politicians need to experience extreme amounts of fear of death every single day.
If congress weren't tyrants themselves, the BATFE wouldn't exist. But let me guess...you vote libertarian and run for office as a Libertarian to make sure a constitutional choice exists on every ballot, right? 😂😂😂😂
Saying "people are using the braces in ways we didn't anticipate" isn't how laws and regulations are supposed to work. This is a prime example of bureaucratic overreach and why our government has such low levels of approval. It's also very telling how the ATF repeatedly tries to evade direct, simple questions.
If it takes both Congress and Senate to make other laws who give the ATF the ability to make laws without any other government body's approval
I love the ATF talking in circles. This is awesome! Thomas Massie for the people! Can anyone actually explain WHY a pistol brace is illegal? If anything I feel like this would hinder any able bodied shooter more than it would ever help... How this makes the weapon deadlier or more dangerous is confusing to me..
Brace= butt stock >>>SBR
He was 1 sentence away from saying firearms that can be shouldered are more dangerous.