And “Bad Timing”?

Obama Defense Secretary Leon Panetta: U.S. Forces Will Have to Return to Afghanistan
Brietbart | Aug. 27, 2021 | Joshua Caplan

Appearing Thursday on CNN’s [misogynistically titled show hosted by the reasonably well-endowed] Erin Burnett OutFront, Obama Defense Secretary Leon Panetta judged that the U.S. military will have to return to Afghanistan to confront ISIS despite President Joe Biden’s withdrawal of U.S. forces from the war-torn country after 20 years of war.

A transcript is as follows:

ERIN BURNETT: So [Biden] is sticking with the August 31st deadline. He’s made it clear that even after that they’ll do whatever they can, but he’s sticking with it. He is not extending it and that it “is what it is,” is what he says. Do you agree with that? Is it right to stick with this August 31st date?

FORMER DEFENSE SEC. PANETTA: Erin, bottom line is that our work is not done in Afghanistan. I know we’ll be removing our troops by a certain date, but the bottom line is our work is not done. We’re going to have to go after ISIS. I’m glad the president said that we’re going to hunt them down and make them pay a price for what they did in killing our warriors and we should. We’re going to have to go back in to get ISIS. We’re probably going to go have to go back in when al-Qaeda resurrects itself as they will with this Taliban. They’ve gave [??] safe haven to al-Qaeda before. They’ll probably do it again. I understand that we’re trying to get our troops out of there, but the bottom line is we can leave a battlefield but we can’t leave the war on terrorism which still is a threat to our security.

Here’s a helicopter, Leon. Here’s a parachute. Here’s a list of people who want to follow you.

ATF Targets Stabilizing Braces
NRA American Rifleman | August 26, 2021

In June, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make nearly all firearms configured with a pistol stabilizing brace subject to the National Firearms Act, requiring taxation and registration of millions of lawfully acquired firearms. The proposal represents a dramatic shift in ATF treatment of pistol-stabilizing braces.

The new rule would implement a points system akin to the method used for determining the legality of imported handguns. Brace-equipped firearms would be required to weigh more than 4 lbs. and measure between 12″ and 26″. Braces installed on firearms meeting those parameters are examined for certain features, and the firearm itself is examined for similar features. Factors include whether or not a brace appears similar to a certain stock design or how the brace is attached to the host firearm. On the ATF-provided worksheet, the features are assigned an arbitrary number of points. Exceeding a pre-determined number of points would make the pistol in question subject to NFA regulation.

The new factoring system makes it nearly impossible for any brace-equipped pistol to avoid classification as an NFA-regulated firearm. Arbitrary evaluation criteria, such as whether or not the brace has a “rear surface useful for shouldering the firearm” gives gun owners no clearly defined parameters. Additionally, ATF doesn’t acknowledge that this rule reverses nearly a decade of assurances that the addition of a stabilizing brace does not create an NFA-regulated firearm.

An open-comment period gives gun owners the opportunity to communicate with the ATF and share their thoughts on the issues, ambiguities and difficulties associated with such a proposal. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action provides a resource for NRA members and gun owners looking to add their thoughts to the register. Comments will be accepted on the proposal up to and including Sept. 8, 2021.

That’s a hell of a lot of notice.