Florida AG's Letter Rips ATF's Pistol Brace Rule

In the wake of Judge Reid O'Connor's groundbreaking ruling on pistol stabilizing braces in the Mock v Garland case, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody has issued a resolute statement aimed at providing clarity on Florida's laws. Her response comes in light of a request from Representative Shane Abbott to address the legal landscape in Florida following Judge O'Connor's decision.

Attorney General Moody's statement is marked by sharp criticism of the ATF's misguided attempt to reclassify pistols equipped with stabilizing braces as Short-Barreled Rifles (SBRs). She vehemently defends the rights of firearm owners in the state and emphasizes that the definition of a short barrel rifle, under both federal and state law, excludes handguns equipped with stabilizing braces.

Moody underscores the key distinction between SBRs and pistols. The definition of a short barrel rifle is rooted in measurements, encompassing factors like the maximum length of the barrel and the overall length of the firearm. In contrast, a handgun is broadly defined as any firearm that can be carried or used with one hand, regardless of the length of its barrel. Moody's statement highlights the fundamental difference between these two categories, emphasizing that they are not interchangeable.

Furthermore, Moody clarifies that shouldering a brace only pertains to its use and does not alter the inherent characteristics of the firearm. Stabilizing braces are designed to enable individuals to use the firearm as intended, with one hand, enhancing stability and control. Attempting to reclassify pistols equipped with braces as SBRs would, in Moody's view, undermine the very definitions carefully crafted by legislators.

In her interpretation of Florida law, Moody firmly states that attaching a stabilizing brace to a pistol does not transform it into a short barrel rifle. Her stance aligns with the essence of Judge O'Connor's ruling, which reiterates that these modifications enhance safety and control without fundamentally changing the nature of the firearm.

This resounding statement from Florida's Attorney General is yet another indicator of the mounting opposition and legal challenges against the ATF's unconstitutional rule regarding stabilizing braces. The ruling by Judge O'Connor, coupled with Moody's firm stance, suggests that this rule may not withstand the scrutiny it faces. There is a growing consensus that this rule lacks a solid legal foundation and could be scrapped all together.

As firearm owners and Second Amendment advocates continue to navigate this evolving legal landscape, the unity of voices like Attorney General Ashley Moody's adds weight to the argument that the ATF's reclassification of stabilizing braces is a misstep that threatens the rights of law-abiding citizens. Florida's clear stance further reinforces the importance of preserving the rights of firearm owners.