Mainstream Media Sets Its Sights on Pistol Braces After Dayton Shooting

In the wake of two high-profile mass shootings last weekend, gun control advocates and leftist politicians beat their drums. The usual callouts dominate the airwaves and social media. So-called “assault weapons” and “high-capacity magazines” once again come under scrutiny from our opponents. The statistical data, or truth, remains irrelevant. Though AR-type rifles statistically claim very few lives per year, gun control zealots remain focused on banning them outright.

Unfortunately, most change in life, politics and policy included, comes as reactive measure. Take the horrible Las Vegas shooting, for example. President Trump, to the chagrin of many in the 2A community, served up bump stocks on a platter. An awful, horrific shooting took place, and bump stocks were simply not worth the fight to some. And so they went.

In an eerily similar scenario, yahoo.com recently reported the Dayton, Ohio shooter, Connor Betts, used an AR-style pistol. The gun reportedly used a pistol brace. If accurate, this follows one of the hotter trends in the firearm industry over the past couple of years. In a down market for AR-15s, AR pistols breathed life into the space, much of that interest fueled by pistol braces.

Pistol Brace Under Fire After Dayton Shooting

While pistol braces and AR pistols have been good for the industry, Betts’s cowardly actions in the Dayton shooting potentially put them in the crosshairs of gun control advocates. The gun was “modified in essence to function like a rifle” and “to avoid any legal prohibitions,” yahoo.com reported, quoting Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl.

“The federal restrictions on short-barreled rifles were enacted to stop people from making rifles, guns fired from the shoulder, more concealable,” yahoo.com surmised. “Rifles typically can fire more powerful cartridges than pistols and shoulder stocks allow the rifles to be fired more accurately.”

“Enter the pistol brace, also known as a stabilizing brace,” yahoo.com reported further. “For all practical purposes, this device allows pistols with short barrels to have something resembling a shoulder stock.”

So why weren’t gun control advocates going after pistol braces prior to the Dayton shooting? They most likely didn’t even know the devices existed. To them, all they saw was an “assault-style” weapon that looked like all of the others they were already after. They didn’t understand the differences and legalities surrounding AR pistol. This says more about the anti-2A crowd, which seems to yell about banning guns before doing any type of research. Historically, that has been the case, where gun control advocates can’t accurately defend what they’re fighting for.

Mark this report as an early salvo fired for regulation or potentially a BATFE reversal on the pistol brace ruling. Rifles and magazine capacities will still likely take the brunt of criticism. Hopefully pistol braces won’t fall victim in the same way bump stock did following Las Vegas.

Didn't find what you were looking for?