Chucktshoes

It’s in the complete story linked. - The Texas AG's office has identified ammunition as a necessity and, as a result, is arguing that those price hikes were against the Texas Business and Commerce Code. The code forbids businesses from "taking advantage of a disaster" by selling "fuel, food, medicine, lodging, building materials, construction tools or another necessity at an exorbitant or excessive price."

Texas AG lists ammunition amongst the other items on the necessities list. The precedent was set prior to this by regulating those other items you listed. If the government can regulate price gouging on anything, it can regulate it on all things.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has accused the Fort Worth-based website Cheaper Than Dirt, which primarily sells firearms, ammunition and hunting gear, of price gouging at the start of the pandemic. The AG's office identified over 4,000 sales that involved price gouging and has directed Cheaper Than Dirt to pay $402,786 in refunds to consumers, according to court documents filed this month. Over 100 people have complained to the AG's office about Cheaper Than Dirt, the Houston Chronicle reported earlier this year. The same week that Gov. Greg Abbott made a pandemic-related disaster declaration in Texas, ammunition orders to Cheaper Than Dirt substantially increased. In response to the increased demand for its products, the website raised the prices on hundreds of its products, according to the AG's office. https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2020/12/16/gun-website-price-gouging-pandemic/3932523001/

I think you misunderstand me. This topic shouldn’t be controversial, but it is hot button. The new section is set up to limit input from those who maybe haven’t garnered standing through participation here. @TGO Davidalready banned someone who just joined only to immediately post in this thread using a proxy IP. Pretty sure it was one of our recently departed “friends”. My thought behind moving it was in the hope of possibly improving the signal to noise ratio, not hiding it away.

Am I alone in thinking this thread should move to the new “Controversial Topics” subforum?

I wouldn’t think that you’d need to do anything too drastic just yet, but maybe stripping anything off of it that might meet the secondary criteria would probably be wise just to be cautious. Things like secondary grips, LPVO, etceteta. Make it as demonstrably designed to be fired with one hand as possible.

They’re making moves against more than just braces. It is being reported that they raided Diversified Machine, a maker of parts for form one suppressor builds. https://www.facebook.com/200640669947740/posts/3880980461913724/?d=n

John Patton spoke with Alex Bosco from SB Tactical tonight.

Considering the unique nature of your situation, I would say yes. The risk versus reward equation is just way out of whack for you.

Me too brother. Meee toooo.

Yup. I wear that one like a badge of honor.

Also, the lesson that @The Big Guyand @Big Gai Anti-Gun Communistfailed to learn was that even if someone nominally agrees with you, being a bloviating asshole ruins any chance of them being on your side. I value the health of this community over any individual person or opinion.

In the interest of transparency to those of y’all whom I am honored to serve, here’s my response to that PM. Have some patience folks. Nothing is ever served by getting your panties in a twist.

I Plus another $30. It’s covered.

I don’t think anyone here could, would or should make a recommendation on what to do with a braced firearm. I would ask some questions when choosing to pick a course of action. Did you purchase the firearm with the brace? Did you purchase the brace over the net, or In person? Did you purchase the brace from a store or from a private party? Did you pay with cash or a credit/debit/check? Did you post pictures of your braced firearm online? Can ownership of the brace be easily tracked to you? As far as registering it as an SBR, yeah, once it is in the registry you can put an actual stock on it and a VFG if you like. All that is wide open.

And here is the link to its official release for the federal register. https://www.federalregister.gov/public-inspection/2020-27857/objective-factors-for-classifying-weapons-with-stabilizing-braces?fbclid=IwAR1eYPcN-rTVW6j_2MHmeJ1VqWmR4gIB0oKaqwHSy7On797AyUP-7iGd6o8

Which is why those of us who protested that decision did so. It was never about the bump stocks. It was about how it was done. It opened the door to reclassify damn near anything with a simple published rule change. For those that supported that...

Nope, you didn’t. But I did back on the 3rd.

Here is a link to a copy of the draft letter in its entirety https://www.dropbox.com/s/cclm7pnr0nnpj40/BATF-braces.pdf?dl=0&fbclid=IwAR2E-1CVaayKbWuqDFdO9LvrdGv1Ib2dcAe--0YypNpKNGwhAYXbvzuzjxk

Nope. I used to think that until I was corrected.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CI4KVCkg_xF/?igshid=160oeh95xcwgt

Or maybe they just don’t have enough demand to warrant even bothering with dying calibers.