1 would be the clear answer for someone who wants to own a SBR but what does that have to do with the pistol brace rule? Removing the pistol brace and waiting it out also seemed like the logical answer for the pistol brace ruling. Pistols and SBR’s are two different firearms. Crossing state lines with a pistol is easy and not so much with an SBR. It seems like you’re trying to twist this into me not caring for SBR’s or people legitimately owning one and that’s not the case.In general, I agree about gun laws being infringements. Since that is out of the way, the NFA exists. It's a thing. Violating it has consequences, even for people who don't agree with it. Two years ago, there were 3 options when it comes to sbr's.
1. Register the sbr as an NFA item.
2. Acquire a sbr (buy/build/etc.) but do not register it even if it means jail time.
3. Do not own an sbr because the law is an infringement.
Which of the 3 options do you feel people should have chosen. I'm not talking about the brace rule here. I'm talking about a few years ago before the brace rule was ever a consideration.