Which will mean, defacto registration, in all states

I can't find what I'm looking for in a cursory search. Weren't pistol braces initially "reasoned" by manufacturers to be for people with disabilities? And wasn't it then deemed to be discriminatory against non-ADA people to be excluded from using pistol braces? And is that what let the cat out of the bag?

The Americans with Disabilities Act has nothing to do with arm braces for firearms.

That's the story they pitched to ATF.

No.
ADA does not contain language regarding firearms or recreational equipment of any kind.
Americans with Disabilities Act
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101) is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability. It affords similar protections against discrimination to Americans with disabilities as the Civil Rights Act of 1964,[1] which made discrimination based on race, religion, sex, national origin, and other characteristics illegal. In addition, unlike the Civil Rights Act, the ADA also requires covered employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, and imposes accessibility requirements on public accommodations.

All cats should be left in the bag. (according to my dogs)

This.

Hopefully Don Jr has STFU about "cool gun stuff" around his dad, least he find out about things he wasn't aware of.

AR pistols do not offer a significant concealment advantage over semi-automatic pistols customarily described as handguns.  The original concern of an SBR was concealment of the weapon such that good guys and innocents could not recognize a potential threat early enough.

Red flag is the big progressive prize and they are enjoying early success passing these laws at the State level.

Following red flag, is the UBC which constrains private transfers and enables a pathway to record keeping of outstanding firearms and ownership.

After red flag and UBC, I would put the magazine capacity restriction.  Mag capacity restrictions are a win for the progressives because it is a path to criminalize almost every gun owner via the "high" capacity defined in the law.

Combine mag capacity restriction with red flag and...

Someone unfamiliar with firearms tends to translate BIG firearm into more dangerous firearm.  ex. - .50BMG

Don't think braces are really on the radar. No notoriety. I see semi-autos getting banned before braces.

Braces aren't in danger yet... AWB, 10 round mags and UBC will all come before braces.

There is a huge Public Relations difference between the BumpStock issue and the brace/SBR issue:
1) People *think* they know what a machine gun is (they see them on TV all the time), and thanks to that Las Vegas mass murderer, they have ALL seen and heard for themselves how a bump-stock'd rifle by golly sure *seems* to act exactly like a machine gun.  It's easy for them to make the connection, and they already "know" how dangerous "machine guns" are without anyone from the Gov telling them.  Thus banning bumpstocks is an easy "its obvious they should be illegal" sale to the general public.

2) NO ONE who is not into firearms has even a vague clue about the difference between a standard rifle and an SBR.  Even after you explain it to them, they'd still be like "so why does the barrel length matter again?"  In the general public's uneducated view, bigger LONGER barrels = more deadlier boolits.  They can see pistols all the time with a 4" barrel (they might even own one or likely know someone who does), so why would a 10" barrel be worse/more deadly than a govt-mandated "safer" 16" barrel?  It is nonsensical to us, and even more nonsensical to those totally unfamiliar with the firearms world.

Does this mean that braces are safe forever?  Does this mean we sit back and become complacent?   OF COURSE NOT.  It just means there are more immediate threats that are far far closer to passing and need our attention a lot more than a possible future brace ban.

It’s important from a cultural perspective, but also from a legal one post-Caetano v Mass.

Also, I only recently jumped on the pistol brace bandwagon, and find that about half my “gun people” friends know about them. For non-gun-people, I use their passing interest in barrel length restrictions to complain about the capriciousness of the NFA and how the regulatory process means that I have to be 100% plugged in to the current regulations and case law lest I accidentally commit a serious federal felony.

Those conversations have planted a lot of seeds, even in people who want gun control. A lot of them want guns restricted but have no idea how complex things already are nor how high the stakes are. They see drug dealers getting out in “time served” and assume that’s even with the gun charges included; they don’t realize that putting a plastic stock instead of a rubber brace on a gun in the wrong order risks 10 years in federal prison and a $100k fine.

Since I know it will never happen I would simply view it as more of Trump’s bullshit.

He had time before Vegas and Parkland to make moves for us... he didn’t. We got nothing but fucked.

if a brace turns someone into a felon over night then alot of people are just going to throw a stock on it since they would be screwed anyway.

99% of the LEO in my area dont even know the specifics of the laws anyway