Pistol brace inventor challenges ‘laughable’ ATF rule at congressional hearing
Kaelan Deese
Video Embed
The inventor of gun stabilizing braces bashed the Biden administration’s proposed restrictions on such attachments as “laughable” during a joint congressional hearing Thursday that took aim at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives’ regulatory authority.
The hearing between the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees entitled “ATF’s Assault on the Second Amendment: When is Enough Enough?” elicited energetic debate over gun deaths and firearm regulations and even resulted in the arrest of Manuel Oliver, a father of a 17-year-old Parkland shooting victim who was detained after “he disrupted a hearing,” according to U.S. Capitol Police.
Before the brief outburst, Alex Bosco, founder and inventor of the stabilizing brace, was one of the four witnesses who spoke to Democratic and Republican lawmakers and testified that his invention “does nothing to make the weapon any more dangerous than it already is.”
Bosco said the reason he initially created his stabilizing brace was to help a friend who suffered from “limited mobility.” The inventor’s testimony comes months after the ATF announced the new rule, which requires owners of guns with stabling braces to register their weapons within 120 days or face potential felony charges.
“Yes, there are people that are not using my product the way that I’ve designed it to be used, but the intent has always been that. The idea that by adding a brace to a pistol, makes the firearm more concealable and, therefore, more dangerous is laughable. It’s a piece of plastic.” Bosco said, arguing the attachment doesn’t make guns more concealable.
Ahead of the Thursday hearing, Republicans this week introduced Congressional Review Act legislation that aims to nullify the Biden administration’s ATF rule if passed by the House and Senate and signed by President Joe Biden.
At one point, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) said his problem with the “unconstitutional” rule wasn’t that it was proposed under a Democratic administration, adding that “I didn’t like it when the Trump administration was doing stuff like this,” referring to the ATF’s 2018 bump stock ban that was inspired in part by a mass shooter that killed 60 and wounded hundreds in Las Vegas.
“I don’t support unending use of emergency powers to carry out that kind of executive action,” Roy added.
Meanwhile, Democrats spent the bulk of the Thursday discussion raising awareness about instances of violence where firearms are involved and accused the hearing, led by Rep. Pat Fallon (R-TX), of being “off base.”
“I just think that the title of this subcommittee hearing is really way off base. Instead of ‘ATF’s Assault on the Second Amendment: When is Enough Enough?’ I think this should be called ‘Defund and Dissolve the ATF,'” Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) said.
The Judiciary Committee hearing comes on the heels of a White House recommendation for a staggering $1.9 billion budget for the ATF, according to a proposal for fiscal 2024, prompting Republicans and gun rights groups to criticize the Biden administration’s use of the agency.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The Republican Freedom Caucus earlier this month set their own budget requests, such as capping discretionary funding and cutting funding for the ATF rule. But the Biden administration has countered that those spending limits would result in cutting important support for government agencies.
“These same House Republicans who opposed the President’s bipartisan reforms and are now threatening to defund or abolish law enforcement agencies, eliminate federal law enforcement officer positions, slash funding for state and local law enforcement, and roll back commonsense measures to keep especially dangerous guns out of dangerous hands,” said Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House.