It’s hard to determine whether gun control advocates are liars or ignorant of the facts. Even worse, it is very likely both. Whatever the case, the people who cry the loudest about misinformation sure do like to peddle it when it comes to gun control. Specifically, in this case, we take some time to fact-check their claims about the pistol-stabilizing brace.
Fact-Checking Pistol-Stabilizing Brace Misinformation
In case you haven’t heard, the ATF recently made felons of millions of law-abiding American citizens overnight. Its new pistol stabilizing brace rule reverses nearly a decade of guidance on pistol classification. As such, the ruling threatens jobs and businesses throughout the industry.
This reclassification comes by unelected bureaucrats doing the bidding of President Biden, who couldn’t get it done democratically. Which is odd, coming from the party that constantly screams about threats to democracy.
In a statement regarding its lawsuit against the ATF back in February of this year, SB Tactical stated:
“Under the guise of ‘public safety,’ the ATF has placed millions of law-abiding firearm owners in legal jeopardy. It’s a gross overreach of the Bureau’s authority and, if allowed to stand, will result in the largest gun registration scheme in U.S. history.”
Of course, in order to garner support for the ATFs illegitimate new rule, gun control advocates have to demonize braces. And there is nothing like some good old-fashioned gaslighting to get the job done.
So, in light of Biden’s end run around the Second Amendment, let’s start with his recent claim about pistol-stabilizing braces.
Biden Claims Stabilizing Braces Make Pistols Shoot “Higher Caliber” Bullets
In a recent speech, President Biden stammered through several claims that deserve a look. And probably a double-eye roll.
During the speech, Biden states, “We’ve made it harder for people to buy stabilizer braces. Put a pistol on a brace, and it turns it into a gun.”
Wait. Full stop. What?!
Fact-Check: False.
If this were true, people would be putting stabilizing braces on everything. The firearm industry would go out of business overnight, and only stabilizing brace companies would survive. Although there would be some very interesting guns out there.
The fact is that an AR pistol is already a gun in and of itself. All a pistol-stabilizing brace (which is just a piece of plastic) does is help stabilize the pistol for better accuracy. It was created to help wounded combat veterans still enjoy shooting sports, despite their injuries.
But he didn’t stop there. He went on to say, “[The brace] makes it where you can have a higher caliber bullet coming out of that gun.”
Fact-Check: False.
The pistol-stabilizing brace has nothing to do with the caliber of the firearm. It only stabilizes the firearm for one-handed operation. Changing the caliber of a firearm is more involved and requires a new barrel—at the least. For the AR platform, you need to change the upper, or at least the barrel and bolt. Not to mention, in many cases, the magazine.
Of course, this is a bit of an oversimplification for the sake of space. And it also depends on the calibers you are switching between. Some calibers are compatible and require less modification. Also, there are rifles that are designed to quickly change calibers.
But it is never done by simply attaching a stabilizing brace.
I won’t belabor the point, but when even CNN fact-checks a Democrat president, something’s gone wrong.
Repeat After Me: A Stabilizing Brace Is Not a Bump Stock
You may remember last July when we reported on some wild claims made by Congressman David Cicilline (D-RI). During a discussion involving a proposed amendment to the “assault weapon” ban, Congresswoman Michelle Fischbach requested an exception for stabilizing braces. It was at this point things took a comedic turn.
I don’t want to rehash it all here, and recommend you read the entire story. But in his objection to the amendment, Congressman Cicilline claimed that a stabilizing brace turns the AR pistol into an automatic weapon.
According to Cicilline, pointing to a picture of an AR pistol, “This stabilizing brace, which is depicted here, when attached here it turns this weapon into an automatic weapon. It becomes a bump stock. And so, it will allow that to essentially be fired like an automatic weapon.”
Fact-Check: False.
Fortunately, Congressman Thomas Massie was there to clarify the difference.
He said, “The Democrats are so zealous in their rush to ban everything related to guns and every gun that exists that I’m afraid Mr. Cicilline has his gun features mixed up. He just described the arm brace, which is used by people with a handicap, as a bump stock. And I think it’s important that if you’re going to ban these things that you actually understand what you’re banning. It’s neither a stock nor a bump stock.”
You really should read the whole story. It just gets better from there.
Any story involving one Congressman telling another Congressman, “The internet’s gonna help you in about five minutes. Cause you’re gonna be famous,” is worth the read.
All the Misinformation in One Place
Recently, the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) sent a letter to U.S. Senators asking them to oppose H.J. Res. 44. The resolution would reverse the ATF’s overreach on regulating pistol braces. Needless to say, there is a lot to unwrap here.
As expected, the letter begins with the usual stories of how stabilizing braces were used in recent shootings. If you want to get support for your cause, always start with emotional engagement.
However tragic the details of the events were, the reality is that a stabilizing brace has never shot anyone. The person behind the firearm performed that heinous act. We do not make light of what happened, but to blame an inanimate object is nothing more than a knee-jerk emotional response. Not to mention, it takes the responsibility off of the criminal and places it on law-abiding gun owners.
Next, the letter states, “Nullifying the federal rule around “stabilizing braces” would make it easier for mass shooters to access weapons of war.”
I’m not even sure how to fact-check this one because there is no evidence for or against this claim. This really comes out of left field. How does an accessory make something more accessible to purchase or acquire? Spoiler alert. It doesn’t.
Time Sure Does Fly
It goes on, “[H.J. Res. 44] would weaken ATF’s authority to enforce a law that has been on the books for nearly 100 years.”
Fact-Check: False.
The ATF’s pistol-stabilizing brace rule has been in effect since June 1 of this year. It hasn’t even been 100 days.
In addition, the letter claims that H.J. Res. 44 would nullify an executive order from the Biden administration to “stop the gun industry from dangerously misbranding “stabilizing braces” and allow the gun industry to circumvent the requirements of the 1934 National Firearms Act.”
Fact-Check: False.
No one is misbranding stabilizing braces. They are sold as stabilizing braces and are marketed as stabilizing braces.
It goes on to say, “…[pistol-stabilizing braces] turn pistols into more lethal short-barreled rifles…”
Fact-Check: False.
A firearm is a firearm. They are lethal. A stabilizing brace does not make them more lethal or more scary. In fact, it makes them safer by helping to improve their aim.
Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud
A little deeper in the letter, the USCM finally gets to the point—gun control through a firearms database.
In the letter, the USCM states, “H.J. Res. 44 would roll back the sensible requirement that those who seek to purchase a “stabilizing brace” undergo the same increased scrutiny as those purchasing short-barreled rifles, including registering the firearm, submitting a photo and fingerprints, and undergoing a background check.”
There it is. Registration, photos, fingerprints. The gun control trifecta.
Fact-Check: True.
H.J. Res. 44 would leave law-abiding citizens the hell alone.
But at least they finished strong:
“The new ATF rule will in no way affect those individuals with disabilities who use a stabilizing brace that does not transform a pistol into a short-barreled rifle.”
So, to clarify, the USCM just stated that a stabilizing brace “does not transform a pistol into a short-barreled rifle.”
Fact-Check: True.
Their words, not ours.
It Is Just a Stabilizing Brace
One thing is for sure, the fear of the pistol-stabilizing brace seems to stem from a belief that it’s imbued with magical powers. In their eyes, this mystical accessory has the ability to become anything it wants—other than what it actually is. Sound familiar?
However, for those of us living in the real world, it is and will always be just a stabilizing brace. No more. No less. It has one function, and it has no interest in identifying as anything else.
We reached out to Alex Bosco, inventor of the Pistol-Stabilizing Brace and Founder of SB Tactical, and this is what he had to say:
“Whether intentionally misleading the American public or not, for leaders in the highest echelon of our government to be perpetuating blatant falsehoods and misinformation is alarming and grossly negligent.
“Pistol Stabilizing Braces in no way increase the lethality of the host firearm. In fact, braces enhance the user’s ability to control and stabilize the firearm, ultimately improving accuracy and, therefore, safety.
“SB Tactical, in conjunction with organizations such as the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition (FRAC), National Rifle Association (NRA), Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), Gun Owners of America (GOA), and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), will continue to fight tirelessly to protect and preserve the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”
Thank you, Alex, for clarification on this simple yet oddly vilified tool. Hopefully, as the fight against the ATFs rule continues to unfold, cooler heads will prevail. The rights of millions of law-abiding Americans depend on it.
The misinformation surrounding the firearm industry as a whole demonstrates that we are dealing with unscrupulous and/or uneducated people. But even worse, it is clear that they think the American people are stupid. Please don’t prove them right.
“God save the Queen, man.”
