Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on January 17, 2023, 08:07:55 AM
-
It doesn't look like they've dropped yet, but there are supposed to be at least three lawsuits ready to go.
I have a couple of guns I was waffling on SBRing before this rule came up, and was thinking about doing them now, with the waived $200 tax, except it appears the tax is not actually waived:
Although the ATF states a 120-day grace period to register a pistol as an SBR, the ATF only promises not to enforce NFA rules on these devices for 60 days. The ATF will give a tax forbearance for the $200 tax stamp fee. A tax forbearance means that the ATF will not collect the $200 tax fee, although, by the law, you still owe the fee; it just will not be collected. The rule is set up the way it is because the ATF cannot waive a tax.
So ten years from now, the ATF, IRS, or whoever could come after me for whatever, stating that like Al Capone, I'm a tax evader. Seems like this "tax forbearance" itself is lawsuit material.
Anyway, with 120 days and lawsuits incoming, I'm not going to panic now, but rather wait to see what happens in the next few weeks.
-
I'm also going to wait and see for a bit. I admit, I have a couple weapons that I was going to SBR anyway, so a free tax stamp is tempting.
More interestingly to me, is if they drag the whole SBR thing into court. SBR regulations won't even stand up under the US v. Miller precedent, much less some of the newer cases. I actually get the feeling that the ATF was going to let this one go, but the POTUS and AG forced them to do something, and the consequences may be pretty bad for gun control.
-
Pretty much where I am too. Wait and see for the moment.
No matter how it turns out, I have a feeling in a few years those millions and millions of pistol braces will be essentially gone.
-
And this is exactly why I have NEVER considered getting a "brace."
-
Pretty much where I am too. Wait and see for the moment.
No matter how it turns out, I have a feeling in a few years those millions and millions of pistol braces will be essentially gone.
I know a bunch of people with a bunch of pistol braces. Lots of us are waiting to see, but no one I know is planning on getting rid of their braces. Perhaps if a bunch of folks SBR their pistols we will see them swapped out for stocks, but we'll see.
-
I know a bunch of people with a bunch of pistol braces. Lots of us are waiting to see, but no one I know is planning on getting rid of their braces. Perhaps if a bunch of folks SBR their pistols we will see them swapped out for stocks, but we'll see.
There are three major possibilities. Only one of which is likely to result in people hanging on to their pistol braces.
1. The new rule is struck down, but SBRs are upheld. Okay, people keep their braces.
2. The new rule is upheld, and SBRs are upheld. People either SBR their guns and put a real stock on them, or toss the braces.
3. NFA restriction on SBRs is eliminated entirely. People put real stocks on their guns and toss the braces.
-
And this is exactly why I have NEVER considered getting a "brace."
I was actually thinking of you and your comment this morning, as this is proof you were wrong all along.
If the hypothetical pistol brace buyer wanted an SBR all along, the current worst case is they get a free tax stamp, and they have their SBR without spending $200. There's a real chance that ATF rulemaking will be curtailed from this (EPA v West Virginia precedent), or parts of the NFA will be chipped away (Miller or Bruen precedent, take your pick.)
Not to mention all the years we got to enjoy shooting a small handy AR, or 5.
-
I figured if the rule goes into effect, you need to remove braces and store them somewhere else to avoid any issues. The legal stuff around this is going to be interesting to watch.
I have considered SBR tax stamp on a couple carbines. Early on I was hearing some odd stuff about the information you had to submit to register an SBR under this rule. I wasn't sure if I wanted to take advantage of the "free" tax stamp. I guess I will learn more about that.
-
There are three major possibilities. Only one of which is likely to result in people hanging on to their pistol braces.
1. The new rule is struck down, but SBRs are upheld. Okay, people keep their braces.
2. The new rule is upheld, and SBRs are upheld. People either SBR their guns and put a real stock on them, or toss the braces.
3. NFA restriction on SBRs is eliminated entirely. People put real stocks on their guns and toss the braces.
4. Rule is upheld, people don't give a *expletive deleted*ck and keep their braces.
My other though is that the current braces are useful enough that people might not run out and drop $100 to slap a stock on there right away. There's not that much added functionality, really*. New Pistol Brace sales are probably finished though, you are correct there.
*I recently pinned and welded a 14.5" AR I had been running with a brace, and put a BCM stock on it. My initial impression was that I probably could have saved that money.
I figured if the rule goes into effect, you need to remove braces and store them somewhere else to avoid any issues. The legal stuff around this is going to be interesting to watch.
I have considered SBR tax stamp on a couple carbines. Early on I was hearing some odd stuff about the information you had to submit to register an SBR under this rule. I wasn't sure if I wanted to take advantage of the "free" tax stamp. I guess I will learn more about that.
If it goes into effect as written, you would need to destroy the braces if you take them off. We'll see what the inevitable requests for injunctions bring.
On the other the only added requirement I was tracking to eForm 1 a pistol was to send in pictures of the rifle's current configuration, and I didn't see that in the new rule, and when I logged in this morning there was a new eForm 1 specifically for tax exempt registrations under this rule. There is no provision for anything more than a normal form 1, you just skip pay.gov step.
You do need to certify that the firearm is eligible for tax exempt registration under the final rule, so it is supposed to have a brace on it right now.
-
And this is exactly why I have NEVER considered getting a "brace."
I avoided SBR stuff until it appeared that it was legal and it was being commonly done. I think I had an AK pistol and later sold it before I heard about braces. Later, we saw major firearms manufacturers were selling "pistols" with braces. The legal fight on this will be interesting to watch.
-
I wonder what % of braces were/are actually used as braces.
I'm asking because that's bound to come up in any court cases.
-
My other though is that the current braces are useful enough that people might not run out and drop $100 to slap a stock on there right away. There's not that much added functionality, really*. New Pistol Brace sales are probably finished though, you are correct there.
*I recently pinned and welded a 14.5" AR I had been running with a brace, and put a BCM stock on it. My initial impression was that I probably could have saved that money.
The SB(3?) braces on a couple of my guns are just about as good as a stock for me and for those guns. The brace on my Canebrake is a piece of crap, and I already have the Sig Minimalist stock sitting in a box to replace that crappy brace when this all turns out however it will turn out.
On the "pinned" comment, I'm interested to see if the brace rule holds, if some smart engineering sorts come out with another workaround. This is just off the cuff, but I was wondering if you could "pin" a can on the end of a barrel? Obviously there are takedown issues for cleaning the can, but I wonder if a pinned mount that you have to attach a can to would count for length? Most cans are at least of a length to cover the 11ish inch barrels out there.
-
On the "pinned" comment, I'm interested to see if the brace rule holds, if some smart engineering sorts come out with another workaround. This is just off the cuff, but I was wondering if you could "pin" a can on the end of a barrel? Obviously there are takedown issues for cleaning the can, but I wonder if a pinned mount that you have to attach a can to would count for length? Most cans are at least of a length to cover the 11ish inch barrels out there.
Sure you could. Some cans are even designed specifically for that. https://www.griffinarmament.com/spartan-3-direct-thread-silencer/ 5.56 cans don't need much, if any, cleaning, but I would be careful with my barrel cleaning patches.
-
*I recently pinned and welded a 14.5" AR I had been running with a brace, and put a BCM stock on it. My initial impression was that I probably could have saved that money.
I had a flash hider pinned and welded onto a Tavor X95 so that I could use the IDF butt plate in place of the American much thicker butt plate. Doing so took an inch off both the total length and LOP. Surprising how just an inch can change the handling but the IDF BP brings the total length below the min 26" so the FH had to pinned to keep it over 26.
25.75" - It's an illegal baby killer.
26" - It's fine.
These laws are flipping stupid, all that just so I could use a different butt plate but at least the gun smith being a friend did it for free.
-
I wonder what % of braces were/are actually used as braces.
I'm asking because that's bound to come up in any court cases.
I have heard that issue brought up before all this. Some braces came with the velcro strap, but the strap was too short to wrap around the forearm. I recall a video by someone talking about that. If you can't actually use it as a brace, you wouldn't have much argument in court.
-
Sure you could. Some cans are even designed specifically for that. https://www.griffinarmament.com/spartan-3-direct-thread-silencer/ 5.56 cans don't need much, if any, cleaning, but I would be careful with my barrel cleaning patches.
I had no idea. My Canebrake and my PWS 111 (11" barrel) are two guns that I always shoot suppressed, and are also the two guns I was looking at SBRing. I'm getting ideas. =)
-
Related to this:
Of the factors the Revenuers use to decide if you have a baby killing gun are the following:
(2) When a weapon provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, the following factors shall also be considered in determining whether the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder:
(i) whether the weapon has a weight or length consistent with the weight or length of similarly designed rifles;
(ii) whether the weapon has a length of pull measured from the center of the trigger to the center of the shoulder stock or other rearward accessory, component or attachment (including an adjustable or telescoping attachment with the ability to lock into various positions along a buffer tube, receiver extension, or other attachment method) that is consistent with similarly designed rifles;
(iii) whether the weapon is equipped with sights or a scope with eye relief that require the weapon to be fired from the shoulder in order to be used as designed;
(iv) whether the surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder is created by a buffer tube, receiver extension, or any other accessory, component, or other rearward
attachment that is necessary for the cycle of operations;
(v) the manufacturer’s direct and indirect marketing and promotional materials indicating the intended use of the weapon; and
(vi) information demonstrating the likely use of the weapon in the general community.
For number vi their training PowerPoint shows a screenshot from YouTube and what looks like an Instagram pic. The implication being if their are guntubers or models running around shouldering versions of your gun, the "community" has decided it's an SBR, so you're screwed. That is both clever and evil, considering social media around guns.
-
And last year I was thinking real hard about getting a CMMG Banshee. BUT . . . thanks to forums like this I heard about what the BATmen were scheming and decided to indefinitely postpone my purchase so I wouldn't get caught in the middle - that kind of feels like a good decision right now.
In a tangentially related topic, I also had the opportunity to handle an HKMP5SD. I liked it about as much as you can like a gun you haven't actually fired, and being in Texas there's a theoretical possibility to legally own one . . . but aside from the Federal paperwork a pre-86 version will probably set me back as much as a new car. A NICE new car. So I don't see one in my gun safe anytime soon.
Now a semi automatic clone . . . expensive but not insanely so. Hmmm . . .
-
I was actually thinking of you and your comment this morning, as this is proof you were wrong all along.
If the hypothetical pistol brace buyer wanted an SBR all along, the current worst case is they get a free tax stamp, and they have their SBR without spending $200. There's a real chance that ATF rulemaking will be curtailed from this (EPA v West Virginia precedent), or parts of the NFA will be chipped away (Miller or Bruen precedent, take your pick.)
Not to mention all the years we got to enjoy shooting a small handy AR, or 5.
IF IF IF IF IF...
For years the whole brace mess has been nothing but IF from the very start.
Even your latest statement is fraught with nothing but IF.
IF ATF rules against braces, and IF ATF doesn't again, in a few years, change the rules once again, then I can keep them IF the courts agree, but IF the courts don't agree, then I can keep it IF ATF doesn't change its ruling once again to make me a felon, and IF ATF does make me a felon and IF ATF prosecutes me, maybe I won't get ass raped in prison IF ATF decides to just fine me.
"If the hypothetical pistol brace buyer wanted an SBR all along..."
And that statement right there, "hypothetical" as it is, puts the absolute bald-faced lie to the entire argument that braces are, we'll braces and not stocks.
I've shot "braced" "pistols." Yeah, it was a "brace," and it was a "pistol."
The whole brace thing smacks of those bullshit "solvent traps."
Yeah, nothing here skirting the law, just some good old boys not wanting to get Hoppes on the floor!
I actually hope that people who decided to go the "brace" route for their "pistols" actually come out ahead on this, because, well Government AFT.
But if people who jumped on this whole bullshit "brace" bandwagon end up getting their heads handed to them on a platter because they thought they could game the system with a snicker, wink, and nod.... well I don't have a lot of sympathy for anyone who actively goes out looking for trouble and then yelps when they get burned.
-
And last year I was thinking real hard about getting a CMMG Banshee. BUT . . . thanks to forums like this I heard about what the BATmen were scheming and decided to indefinitely postpone my purchase so I wouldn't get caught in the middle - that kind of feels like a good decision right now.
In a tangentially related topic, I also had the opportunity to handle an HKMP5SD. I liked it about as much as you can like a gun you haven't actually fired, and being in Texas there's a theoretical possibility to legally own one . . . but aside from the Federal paperwork a pre-86 version will probably set me back as much as a new car. A NICE new car. So I don't see one in my gun safe anytime soon.
Now a semi automatic clone . . . expensive but not insanely so. Hmmm . . .
PSA has been selling a bunch of the Turkish MKE clones for a pretty good price the last 2 months. Not sure if they have the model you are looking for. I have only seen the K model highlighted recently.
-
But if people who jumped on this whole bullshit "brace" bandwagon end up getting their heads handed to them on a platter because they thought they could game the system with a snicker, wink, and nod.... well I don't have a lot of sympathy for anyone who actively goes out looking for trouble and then yelps when they get burned.
What outcome is getting their heads handed to them? A free tax stamp? Don't throw me in that briar patch.
And I got to shoot and train with several very functional firearm for damn near a decade, while you....didn't, and poo pooed the whole idea.
The only "if" is if the outcome gets better than free SBR.
-
The only "if" is if the outcome gets better than free SBR.
That's how I see it. Other than the nebulous "tax waiver", the worst case scenario for me is just SBRing the guns that need to be SBRd. I guess if I lived in a state where I couldn't have NFA stuff like cans I might be more up in arms having to do the forms, but the ATF already knows everything about me via my current NFA items.
Obviously I would prefer the whole SBR debacle to just go away since it's nonsense, just like I don't think I should have to fill anything out when I buy a gun at the gun store.
-
There are a few outfits discounting some upper tier branded braced pistols recently. Some went out of stock quickly. Mrgunsngear posted links on his Telegram feed.
I think it was mostly EuroOptic.com. Last one was an LWRC ICDI 300 blackout AR with 10.5" barrel.
-
Not having read the rule yet, I am still in the dark. I heard a rumor that some "pistols" might still be considered SBR's even with the brace removed. Have any of you heard that? It may have been the original version.
-
There are a few outfits discounting some upper tier branded braced pistols recently. Some went out of stock quickly. Mrgunsngear posted links on his Telegram feed.
I think it was mostly EuroOptic.com. Last one was an LWRC ICDI 300 blackout AR with 10.5" barrel.
You bringing that up reminded me of something I saw a few weeks ago. We have an Idaho/Utah regional gunseller called Impact Guns. I sometimes use their website to search for guns and prices. When I was on the site a few weeks ago, I saw a bunch of AR pistols of the exact same model with two different clickable photos. One was with a brace and marked "discontinued", the other was of the AR pistol with just the buffer tube, so apparently they are selling many of the AR pistols as "bare" with just the buffer tube, and leaving it to the new owner if they want to put something on the tube.
I wonder if their lawyers told them to do that?
-
120 days
Unless this is struck down fairly quickly the ATF is going to be hit with millions of tax stamp apps within a very short period and it will be interested to see just how jammed up they get and I doubt seriously you're going to see your stamp for a loooong time and probably not within 120 days.
Since I'm not clear on this 120 days thing is it 120 to apply or 120 to get your tax stamp? If the latter are they going to allow for delays or will you be illegally in procession of an SBR after 120 day if you still don't have your tax stamp in hand?. I'm hoping and assuming the former but this is the ATF we're talking about here. And what happens if you get rejected? Are you now automatically a felon?
-
Not having read the rule yet, I am still in the dark. I heard a rumor that some "pistols" might still be considered SBR's even with the brace removed. Have any of you heard that? It may have been the original version.
As in because of total length? I'm unsure as well, and need to check regarding my Canebrake - 5.5" barrel and 20" overall length with a folding stock. It would certainly fall into a length "gotchya".
-
120 days
Unless this is struck down fairly quickly the ATF is going to be hit with millions of tax stamp apps within a very short period and it will be interested to see just how jammed up they get and I doubt seriously you're going to see your stamp for a loooong time and probably not within 120 days.
Since I'm not clear on this 120 days thing is it 120 to apply or 120 to get your tax stamp? If the latter are they going to allow for delays or will you be illegally in procession of an SBR after 120 day if you still don't have your tax stamp in hand?. I'm hoping and assuming the former but this is the ATF we're talking about here. And what happens if you get rejected? Are you now automatically a felon?
More than one guntuber brought that up and suggested wait times of well over a year based on personnel and number of potential filings. Also some suggestions that ATF might purposely "slow walk" applications.
Also I read that ATF said they would start enforcing this in 60 days regardless of the 120 day grace period.
-
"What outcome is getting their heads handed to them? A free tax stamp? Don't throw me in that briar patch."
Oh, you're actually expecting AFT to make this rule and decide that everything is fine and dandy and done and they're not going to change that rule in the future, because... reasons. How many times have they moved forwards, and then backwards, on "brace" rules in the past 10 or so years or however long "braces" have been a thing?
Cute.
May those odds be ever in your favor, Effie Trinket.
And the entire concept of a free tax stamp is the most laughable thing I've ever heard of...
Nothing from the government is ever free.
Ever.
Why would I need to throw any of you into the briar patch when you've all been willingly walking into it from the very start?
-
4. Rule is upheld, people don't give a *expletive deleted*ck and keep their braces.
Eh. In for a penny, in for a pound. I'd wager there will be more ignorant ongoing violations than intentional.
My other though is that the current braces are useful enough that people might not run out and drop $100 to slap a stock on there right away. There's not that much added functionality, really*. New Pistol Brace sales are probably finished though, you are correct there.
They're meh and if you're happy with them then great, but if NFA goes away I'm spending money on stocks not keeping pistol braces. I might not spend $100 for every one, but I'd drop $40 for an MOE swap all day long. I'm not trying to undervalue them - they were great options for a long time, but I don't feel like I have to pretend they're just as good.
-
There are a few outfits discounting some upper tier branded braced pistols recently. Some went out of stock quickly. Mrgunsngear posted links on his Telegram feed.
I think it was mostly EuroOptic.com. Last one was an LWRC ICDI 300 blackout AR with 10.5" barrel.
Transferring those mail order guns might be a challenge
120 days
Unless this is struck down fairly quickly the ATF is going to be hit with millions of tax stamp apps within a very short period and it will be interested to see just how jammed up they get and I doubt seriously you're going to see your stamp for a loooong time and probably not within 120 days.
Since I'm not clear on this 120 days thing is it 120 to apply or 120 to get your tax stamp? If the latter are they going to allow for delays or will you be illegally in procession of an SBR after 120 day if you still don't have your tax stamp in hand?. I'm hoping and assuming the former but this is the ATF we're talking about here. And what happens if you get rejected? Are you now automatically a felon?
It's to submit the Form 1.
From the ATF FAQ:
25. PRIOR TO AND AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE 120-DAY TAX FORBEARANCE, CAN I CONTINUE TO
POSSESS MY SBR EQUIPPED WITH A “STABILIZING BRACE” IF I HAVE TIMELY SUBMITTED MY APPLICATION TO
REGISTER MY FIREARM?
• Yes. Provided you are not otherwise prohibited from possession of a firearm under Federal or
State law, you may continue to lawfully possess your SBR while your registration application is
pending with ATF. While your application is pending, you should maintain proof of submission as
evidence of continued lawful possession.
-
"What outcome is getting their heads handed to them? A free tax stamp? Don't throw me in that briar patch."
Oh, you're actually expecting AFT to make this rule and decide that everything is fine and dandy and done and they're not going to change that rule in the future, because... reasons. How many times have they moved forwards, and then backwards, on "brace" rules in the past 10 or so years or however long "braces" have been a thing?
Cute.
May those odds be ever in your favor, Effie Trinket.
And the entire concept of a free tax stamp is the most laughable thing I've ever heard of...
Nothing from the government is ever free.
Ever.
Why would I need to throw any of you into the briar patch when you've all been willingly walking into it from the very start?
OK Boomer Fudd.
-
OK Boomer Fudd.
Boomer Fudd works too.
-
What are the lawsuits going to be about?
That pistols with braces aren't SBRs?
That the NFA is unconstitutional? (pleasant fantasy)
The rule change is capricious?
-
What are the lawsuits going to be about?
That pistols with braces aren't SBRs?
That the NFA is unconstitutional? (pleasant fantasy)
The rule change is capricious?
How about how the ATF and all of their made up as they go "laws" is unconstitutional
-
What are the lawsuits going to be about?
That pistols with braces aren't SBRs?
That the NFA is unconstitutional? (pleasant fantasy)
The rule change is capricious?
This is being discussed over on The Firing Line, and some fairly sharp lawyer types have chimed in. Basically, there is a definition of "rifle" in federal law, in both the NFA and the GCA. And this new BATFE rule changes (expands on) that definition -- and federal rules are not supposed to be allowed to change statutory definitions.
That's one basis on which the new rule could (and probably will) be challenged.
-
Another argument maybe that the ATF approved the brace in an earlier rule and has since gone back against their initial rule?
Like most of you, I’m in a holding pattern on my AR pistol. If anything I’ll pull the brace and leave it with the buffer tube only.
Heard a rumor tho that the new rule calls for a 6-61/2” buffer tube length rule which is below the industry standard…..but haven’t found the exact verbiage yet.
-
Heard a rumor tho that the new rule calls for a 6-61/2” buffer tube length rule which is below the industry standard…..but haven’t found the exact verbiage yet.
The rule is not that specific. That would be easy to comply with. The rule says if the LOP from the "rear surface area" is "consistent with similarly designed rifles" it may be an SBR.
What it does say is that an AR with a 6-6.5" buffer tube may not be an SBR because that's necessary for the firearm to function.
-
I know it's probably a fantasy, but I would like a lawyer to point out that the SBS portion of the NFA was upheld in Miller because in 1939 because "Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation."
Then hold up an M4.
-
And a likely to go nowhere bill has been introduced.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v59slk8IghU
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/381?r=13&s=1
Honestly I think I'm more confused after reading that definition of "Pistol"
-
And a likely to go nowhere bill has been introduced.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v59slk8IghU
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/381?r=13&s=1
Honestly I think I'm more confused after reading that definition of "Pistol"
? ? ?
-
Gaetz has one as well. I'm not real crazy about that one either, as he is focusing on braces for disabled people. I would rather that whole "for the disabled" goes away in favor of "for everybody". That using a special class to get it for the rest of us will bite us in the ass. They need to promote SBRs being common use and no different than any other rifle.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gaetz-introduces-abolish-atf-act-ruling-against-stabilizing-braces
-
Think the Supreme Court is going to have your back when ATF changes its mind on braces... again? Even if you have one of their super special exception stamps?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-court-rejects-new-york-gun-retailers-bid-block-new-concealed-carry-laws
May the odds be ever in your favor, Effie.
-
Calm down President Snow, If they change their minds again, that means the braces are back to unregulated. We'll survive. Just go back to plinking with your .22 at no more than 1 round every 5 sec.
(https://www.magicalquote.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Never-tell-me-the-odds.jpg)
-
Think the Supreme Court is going to have your back when ATF changes its mind on braces... again? Even if you have one of their super special exception stamps?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-court-rejects-new-york-gun-retailers-bid-block-new-concealed-carry-laws
May the odds be ever in your favor, Effie.
With that ruling, I think SCOTUS is just saying that the case needs to work its way through the lower courts first before they will look at it.
-
Tried to read the rule and make a determination if I’ll be ok if I put my old pistol tube back on in place of the SB brace. Here’s a pic of my old tube but the back end isn’t rounded so would the ATF say it’s shoulder able?
(https://i.imgur.com/xZI7YVBl.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/rUMW2SZl.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Hfa75RQl.jpg)
-
Only the ATF can answer that, and you better get it in writing.
According to the rule, they don't only consider rear surface area, but LOP, sights/optics, overall length, weight, added accessories that indicate two handed use, and the phase of the moon.
Since one of the compliance options is taking off the brace, you would think a bare buffer tube would pass muster, but if that was my plan, I would probably request a determination letter for my pistol, with the serial number in the letter.
I have always questioned the usefulness of an AR pistol sans some kind of brace. If you don't want to SBR it, why not make it a rifle? How long is your current barrel? Can you pin and weld a muzzle device to get it over 16"?
-
My dreamworld take on it is that this "new" panel of SCOTUS judges has declined to look at it is so that more and more complainants will join in a massive winner take all joining of cases where they can finally declare that the 2A means exactly what it says in plain simple look-it-up English and be done with the issue.
Bye-bye New York's Sullivan law. Bye-bye NFA. Bye-bye GCA. Bye-bye pre-assumption that what's passed into law must inherently be constitutional by virtue of the officeholders' so-called "oaths" of office.
Oops. Alarm clock. Wonder if there's any coffee left from yesterday. Yawn, stretch, stumble toward the bathroom...
-
Only the ATF can answer that, and you better get it in writing.
How long is your current barrel? Can you pin and weld a muzzle device to get it over 16"?
Barrel is 10”. Already have a .300 BO SBR on a trust. Trying to decide if I want to SBR this one or not. Kind of like the pistol set up I have…. :-[
-
120 days
Unless this is struck down fairly quickly the ATF is going to be hit with millions of tax stamp apps within a very short period and it will be interested to see just how jammed up they get and I doubt seriously you're going to see your stamp for a loooong time and probably not within 120 days.
Since I'm not clear on this 120 days thing is it 120 to apply or 120 to get your tax stamp? If the latter are they going to allow for delays or will you be illegally in procession of an SBR after 120 day if you still don't have your tax stamp in hand?. I'm hoping and assuming the former but this is the ATF we're talking about here. And what happens if you get rejected? Are you now automatically a felon?
I'm not the only one worried about this especially what happens if you're rejected.
Add to this the 88 days rule on the background checks. If you're not cleared within 88 day it's an auto rejection.
They asked the ATF at Shot Show what happens then and the answer from the ATF was "They'll take an enforcement action at that time" :facepalm:
BREAKING ATF NEWS! Gun Owners of America Uncovers Fatal Flaw In Pistol Brace Rule...IT'S A TRAP!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DggOmUXxVWY
-
Just listened to the video. Interesting take on it.
-
Didn't catch, if they even mentioned it, that it was the Deputy Dir saying that.
A really short video that may explain it a bit clearer
ALERT! ATF Deputy Director tells GOA: NICS "Pistol Brace" auto-denial triggers ATF "enforcement"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfMjV9uxlPs
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DggOmUXxVWY
-
https://youtu.be/vHMiddI43a0
-
I am intrigued that this hasn't actually been published in the Federal Register yet. It should have only taken a day or two.....
-
I am intrigued that this hasn't actually been published in the Federal Register yet. It should have only taken a day or two.....
Hopefully someone in the ATF chain of command said “what the hell” and put a hold on it….. [tinfoil]
-
I dunno, they've been chewing on this long enough if their internal chain of command was going to do that, they would have. The AG and CinC have directed them to do something about the rash of scary short guns on the YouTubez, so I think it's still coming.
I just find it interesting. Supposedly the copy we have is the one that was signed by the AG on 13 Jan. The ATF said they transmitted it to the Government Printing Office last Friday. The Register is published daily, and normally the GPO doesn't sit on these things, so where's the rule? Is GPO just being slow? Did ATF not get it in the email on Friday?
I wouldn't hold my breath for a last minute reprieve, but it's interesting to me that it's delayed.
-
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.”
― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
-
Well, they have to publish it for that to work.
-
I wouldn't hold my breath for a last minute reprieve, but it's interesting to me that it's delayed.
This.
They were so in a lather about getting this done, but suddenly it's being slowed-walked to the FR? Something is up. I wonder if a bunch of conservative reps beginning to flex their newly-appointed committee chairships might be influencing the process.
Brad
-
According to this included in this new rule anything that has been imported that has had a brace put on it will have to be destroyed or surrendered to the ATF
The new ATF brace rule will force the destruction of many imported pistols according to FRAC. Here is a link to FRAC's discovery of this hidden bomb in the new brace rule.
BREAKING NEWS: New ATF brace rule forces destruction of imported pistols!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK4gJeJ_CI4
-
That's important nuance that needs to be considered. I don't have any imported pistols so I wasn't tracking it, but MAC is being a little over the top.
You need to make the rifle 922(r) compliant if you register it. That doesn't necessarily mean destroy or surrender, but it may be a challenge to find US made parts for some designs.
Still, that's an important point to remember.
-
Here's The Yankee Marshal basically calling BS on what everyone else is saying about the rule change.
Pistol Brace Registration Truths...and Lies! (and the Liars Telling Them!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiPk8zQvMr8
-
I, for one, am immensely grateful that our overlords in the BATFE have seen fit to construct a final rule that is so crystal clear that all previous confusion has been totally resolved and eliminated. (https://forum.m1911.org/images/smilies/bolt.gif)
-
More from TYM.
Not endorsing anything he says here just passing it along.
GOA's (and Their Paid Shills) Lies About 922R Compliance Exposed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egAbEtRgGNg
-
He is such an ahole. Whatever useful infor (and he does have some) his videos contained are buried behind a 5 min "I'm awesome, people I don't like are evil, and you're stupid" intro.
On the subject of the video, GOA is correct that 922(r) applies to SBRs, but not pistols, so there are a number of imported pistols out there that are prohibited from being made into rifles. Of course it's also prohibited to have an unregistered SBR.
The trick is in when exactly the rifle was "made".
If you bought a Skorpion EVO pistol with brace installed, it looks like that is going to be 922(r) non compliant because it was (according to the ATF) a crypto-sbr during it's importation.
If you bought an imported pistol, and installed the brace yourself then You are the person making the crypto-sbr at that time, and the only way to make it 922(r) compliant would be to have swapped out enough of the (unmarked and undated) 922 compliance parts prior to installing the stock.
BUT here's what 922(r) actually says:
It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to—
(1)the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(2)the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.
You can't assemble a 9221(r) non-compliant rifle. It says nothing about possessing one. So there's no legal reason that you can't register (if you want) your 922(r) non-compliant rifle, especially if you didn't assemble it. ATF does say in the final rule (the responding to comments about costs associated with the rule) that "ATF assumes this group may use another scenario, such as destroying the firearm or turning it in to ATF, by using the population derived from bump-stock-type devices as a proxy" but assuming is not a requirement. ATF says themselves that the criminal act was the "assembly" into a rifle, not the possession of the rifle.
ATF may decline to register a 922(r) non-compliant rifle, but I'll bet good money they won't because if they don't register the rifle, then everyone that has an imported pistol with a brace that they didn't install now has standing to sue. That's just my opinion though.
Clear as mud. right?
Also: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/search?conditions%5Bpublication_date%5D%5Bgte%5D=12%2F25%2F2022&conditions%5Bterm%5D=stabilizing+brace
Still not there.......
-
Guns & Gadgets
20 minutes ago
FYI…ATF Final Rule to hit Federal Register on January 31, 2023 meaning 120th day would be Wednesday May 31, 2023.
https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxI5wTsIF-wXp6liimyPevZGmxMi6RmlEa
-
According to Guns & Gadgets the ATF may also be targeting PGO shotguns like the Mossberg Shockwave.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZd10QDu4Dk
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/1a3c1a9161fc67f66490634c6865cdb5.jpg)
-
120 day clock started
-
Still undecided if I want to comply or just pull the brace and put back on the pistol tube….
-
G&G just posted this
https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxwmFqAxAL-KvVL3ttzIt9mxZ3px1zmdqj
(https://yt3.ggpht.com/HDnbGVK4FiSYJU-yUTp3_wBM25HEEOaWACbbo74EaPAFPgCgqBlG5A51U9ffI8tk0sZ_DnkT67OISQ=s1600-nd-v1)
-
As of this week, this is what the AR pistol catalog looks like at Sportsmans Warehouse:
https://www.sportsmans.com/shooting-gear-gun-supplies/handguns/handguns/c/cat-modern-sporting-pistols
-
https://youtu.be/EH9FxfCL5Ic
-
House Republicans pretend they have grown a pair:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7ncSq6dINE
-
I'd be really interested in the number of brace Form 1s submitted so far.
-
I'd be really interested in the number of brace Form 1s submitted so far.
It seems like the majority of guntuber* videos are saying to wait or do the "will not comply" thing. I think there are good reasons to wait, which is what I'm doing.
I might do "will not comply". My state will surely refuse to comply with the feds, so then it comes down to how many cops the feds have to go into every gun range in every town in every state looking for non-compliance. I still worry about looking over my shoulder, but if we're doing the math, there's probably less than a 1% chance for most of us to have an ATF guy walk up to us at the range. Even less of a chance to have them come knocking on your door if you're in a state where you can skip the NICS check.
*Obviously the majority of these guys have no legal expertise, but they probably do influence a lot of decisions.
-
“Will not comply” doesn’t bother the AFT a bit. Tons of people didn’t and don’t comply with the NFA. They don’t bother chasing everyone down with an illegal machine gun or who has taped a soda bottle to their .22. If not defeated in court (which seems unbelievable in the era of Bruen) - by someone who does the civil disobedience thing instead of the “do not comply” thing - it will just be another add-on charge they hit people with who are having their weapons seized for something else, or something used by snitches to justify their sweetheart plea deals.
For the AFT, lawbreakers are their customers. In some cases more literally, in others more figuratively.
All I can say is that if you do get busted for your illegal arm brace, don’t take the plea deal they offer. This will only be fixed by the courts when someone risks serious jail time in a trial. If you don’t get busted, find someone who is serving as a test case and fund their defense.
-
it will just be another add-on charge they hit people with who are having their weapons seized for something else, or something used by snitches to justify their sweetheart plea deals.
True. We have been in Atlas Shrugged territory on this for more than guns for some time now. We are already every one of us, felons.
-
The NRA just dropped their lawsuit, with co-plaintiffs SB Tactical and 25 states.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nra-25-states-sue-biden-atf-stop-arbitrary-unlawful-pistol-brace-rule
I have to add (again) that I do not like these lawsuits that use disabled veterans and others to push this "they're for the disabled" crap. It's going to come back and bite us in the ass if whichever lawsuit is won on those grounds.
-
At this point, no one should be able deny braces are in common use, for what it is worth. Probably nothing.
-
What about people that don't keep up with the latest gun news? ATF going to start throwing them in jail after 120 days for not following the news? You know there are some out there unaware that their gun now needs to be registered within 120 days.
-
What about people that don't keep up with the latest gun news? ATF going to start throwing them in jail after 120 days for not following the news?
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Unless you are a cop charged with enforcing the law.
-
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Unless you are a cop charged with enforcing the law.
But in this case ignorance of a change of a law
-
Knock Knock
We changed the law, you're now a felon.
-
Knock Knock
We changed the law, you're now a felon.
-
https://youtu.be/-Czcibgujl8
-
https://www.amazon.com/HIYYUE-Handlebar-Downhill-Foldable-Bicycles/dp/B0BLHNMFL3/
-
https://www.amazon.com/HIYYUE-Handlebar-Downhill-Foldable-Bicycles/dp/B0BLHNMFL3/
Took a screen shot in case they take it down
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/Screenshot_2023-03-05_193403.png)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/Screenshot_2023-03-05_193600.png)
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/Screenshot_2023-03-06_073536.png)
-
And of this morning
Currently unavailable.
We don't know when or if this item will be back in stock.
-
I just saw this, supposedly tweeted from the House Judiciary Committee. I haven't found anything on the MSM sites yet. Nor do I know what it means. I suspect not much.
House Judiciary GOP
@JudiciaryGOP
·
Follow
#BREAKING: The Judiciary Committee just voted to repeal the ATF’s unconstitutional ban on pistol braces.
Big win for the Second Amendment.
11:10 PM · Apr 19, 2023
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2023/04/20/keith-olbermann-notes-the-second-amendment-doesnt-protect-the-right-to-own-a-firearm/
-
I just saw this, supposedly tweeted from the House Judiciary Committee. I haven't found anything on the MSM sites yet. Nor do I know what it means. I suspect not much.
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2023/04/20/keith-olbermann-notes-the-second-amendment-doesnt-protect-the-right-to-own-a-firearm/
A bit more info: https://rollcall.com/2023/04/20/house-committee-advances-disapproval-resolution-on-gun-rule/
-
Interesting testimony by the ATF Director. Thomas Massie is showing him the original brace that the ATF used for the "it's okay to use" rule. This guy should be working at a shoe store somewhere, not directing the ATF.
https://youtu.be/9pveteocUpE
-
Watched some of the hearing via Twitter and yea, they gave him a hard time but I’m betting nothing is gonna change on the brace front or the searchable records
-
Interesting testimony by the ATF Director. Thomas Massie is showing him the original brace that the ATF used for the "it's okay to use" rule. This guy should be working at a shoe store somewhere, not directing the ATF.
https://youtu.be/9pveteocUpE
"Eh ... what a maroon."
-
Watched some of the hearing via Twitter and yea, they gave him a hard time but I’m betting nothing is gonna change on the brace front or the searchable records
Yeah, I wouldn't trust anything he said. In that same clip, he said that they "made it easy" on gun owners in that all they had to do was separate the brace from the gun, and that they wouldn't go after anyone who had both a brace an a gun in their home, "other than for intent". Which means that when they want, they will consider "intent" as having a brace and a gun that can take a brace in your home.
-
If you say something that pisses them off, they will find you had intent.
Ref: Matt Hoover and CRS Firearms
-
Some injunction news coming out today. Not a blanket injunction so we will see.
HUGE NEWS!! Injunction Granted in Pistol Brace Case...BUT...
Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATFmPOQ9-68
Breaking News: Mock Gets Injunction Against Pistol Brace For Plaintiffs
John Crump News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDlgbRNVANk
GOA Ask For A TRO Citing The Mock Injunction and FPC Ask The 5th If All FPC Members Are Covered
John Crump News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-AN9QppfNU
-
^^^
Every guntube channel seems to have dropped a "devastating to the ATF" video about this in the last 24 hours, but for the life of me (IANAL), I can't see where it's any major win. Personally, I think we're going to need to wait for the lawsuits that drop after the deadline to see if anything good will happen.
-
I do suspect a great many owners of braced pistols have NO idea - none whatsoever - that unelected bureaucrats have decided to make law and make ownership of their own legally purchased braced pistols retroactively illegal.
-
I do suspect a great many owners of braced pistols have NO idea - none whatsoever - that unelected bureaucrats have decided to make law and make ownership of their own legally purchased braced pistols retroactively illegal.
I would hazard to guess that it's the vast, vast majority. People like those of us here that both shoot and pay attention to the gun community are going to be a very small percentage of AR owners. Like with any other dumb laws that have passed in the past, most people see guns or ammo or magazines in the gun store and just (and I can't blame them) assume it's all legal to purchase and will remain legal to own.
-
I would hazard to guess that it's the vast, vast majority. People like those of us here that both shoot and pay attention to the gun community are going to be a very small percentage of AR owners. Like with any other dumb laws that have passed in the past, most people see guns or ammo or magazines in the gun store and just (and I can't blame them) assume it's all legal to purchase and will remain legal to own.
Quite correct. Thing is, I was seriously considering purchase of either a braced CMMG Banshee or a braced HKMP5 (maybe a clone) with an eye to eventually suppressing it. (Yes, I know about suppressor paperwork. ;) ) But if braces become/remain subject to NFA requirements, I may as well just cough up the extra $200 for an actual SBR.
-
I would hazard to guess that it's the vast, vast majority. People like those of us here that both shoot and pay attention to the gun community are going to be a very small percentage of AR owners. Like with any other dumb laws that have passed in the past, most people see guns or ammo or magazines in the gun store and just (and I can't blame them) assume it's all legal to purchase and will remain legal to own.
All too true. My state was one of those that passed an omnibus "gun safety" bill (169 pages worth! in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook school shooting. Previously-legal, post-ban configuration AR-15s suddenly became "assult weapons" overnight because the definition of "assault weapon" changed from two evil features allowed to only one. We were given a window (don't remember now if it was 90 days or six months) to register them with the State Police or to dispose of them out of the state.
After considering options and ramifications, I reluctantly registered mine. Several months after the registration window had closed, one of the guys at work asked me how to register his AR. He wasn't happy when I (and several other people) told him he couldn't register it, and that he was now a felon.
-
I know some of you don't like the Armed Attorneys, but this video was informational to me because (I believe as continued fallout of the ATF Director testifying that all you have to do is separate the brace and the gun) the ATF is apparently pushing a couple of (pre-existing?) terms of art now: "Constructive possession" and "unlawful assembly".
Both terms appear to be related the ATF covering themselves due to the Director's testimony. In other words (IMO), they are inserting the terms into their rules explanations to make it easier for them to prove that having an AR pistol and a separate brace in the same home, gun safe, range bag, or whatever, is "constructive possession" and thus intent.
https://youtu.be/q5XasYQ8W7A
-
The ATF Director's brain fart aside, the ATF has held for as long as I remember that if you had a spare stock, and an AR pistol capable of acepting that stock, you were in constructive possesion of an SBR. That's the whole reason smooth "pistol" buffer tubes exist, so you could have a tube that didn't accept any stock lying around.
There was never any reason to think once they decided a pistol brace was a stock that they changed their mind on the constructiv posssession thing.
The rule itself says your options are:
1. Remove the short barrel and attach a 16-inch or longer
rifled barrel to the firearm.
2. Permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the
“stabilizing brace” such that it cannot be reattached.
3. Turn the firearm into your local ATF office.
4. Destroy the firearm.
5. Register the weapon as set forth below depending on
your category of possessor
bolding mine. Basically the Directorwas mistaken and/or full of *expletive deleted*it and the ATF is making sure everyone knows what he sadi isn't correct.
ETA and Side Note: Many pistol braces slide on to a normal carbine 4 or 6 position reciever extension. While removing and destroying/altering the brace would solve the pistol brace issue arrising from this rule (if that's your choice) you will then be left withan AR pistol sporting a bare Reciever Extension. If you have any other stocks lying around (or possibly on other guns, it's unclear) you'll be in old school 90's style constructive posssesion of an SBR. If that's you choice of compliance, smart money would alter the pistol so it won't except stocks, either by swapping to a smooth "pistol" RE, or modifying your carbine RE so it won't accept a stock.
-
While removing and destroying/altering the brace would solve the pistol brace issue arrising from this rule (if that's your choice) you will then be left withan AR pistol sporting a bare Reciever Extension. If you have any other stocks lying around (or possibly on other guns, it's unclear) you'll be in old school 90's style constructive posssesion of an SBR.
I wonder how they'll handle a 1913 interface?
(https://www.sigsauer.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2f7933e2ff16f0ec074a16ab6b6195f2/p/m/pmcx-300b-5b-tap-cane-nb-1.jpg)
-
I wonder how they'll handle a 1913 interface?
(https://www.sigsauer.com/media/catalog/product/cache/2f7933e2ff16f0ec074a16ab6b6195f2/p/m/pmcx-300b-5b-tap-cane-nb-1.jpg)
Depends on how pissed off they are at the person with that pistol.
If it were me, and I were worried about this issue, I would either mill the pic rail off, or SBR that gun. There's not really anything you can do with that rail EXCEPT put a stock on it so it'd be a PITA to explain in court, even moreso if the owner happened to have a Spear or Vertis in the safe with the stock *right there*. I have no idea how zealous they are going to be with unregistered SBRs and Constructive Possession vis a vis ex-pistols, but if I were a betting man I'd be they aim to make a few examples to scare the normies away from the line.
-
You probably could find a sling attachment ring to put on the rail. Doesn't remove the rail, but it does provide a legal reason for it to be there.
"No, I wasn't planning to attach a stock, sir. I want to attach a sling so I can hide it under a trench coat." :laugh: =| [tinfoil]
-
I can't keep track of everything, but the story is probably referencing the same 5th Circuit ruling from a few days ago. Rather than the ruling, what was interesting to me in this story was the numbers of AR pistols reported by ATF.
ATF claims 3 million. The Congressional Research Service is using the number that I usually see - 10 million to 40 million. I'm curious what each of them is using to come up with estimates.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal-court-deals-blow-atf-pistol-brace-rule-gun-accessory-registration-deadline
-
More interesting news. If you're a Firearms Policy Coalition member, you're exempt from the brace rule. BIG supposedly.
https://youtu.be/Ip5rHrm2Zas
Also Mrgunsngear just dropped this as well:
https://youtu.be/ioEEhmLkxHw
-
Sounds suspiciously like a plot by FPC to increase membership, but ... sure, why not ...
-
It sounds like they did clarify it to apply to Plantiffs listed only.
Any relief beyond what is explicitly requested, which arguably would
be tantamount to a nationwide injunction, is DENIED.
https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6710/attachments/original/1685129339/Mock_v_Garland_Order_on_Motion_for_Clarification.pdf?1685129339
Do we have to join FPC now? :facepalm:
bob
-
The ATF puts the *expletive deleted*ck in cluster *expletive deleted*ck
-
Ok, so what is going on with the brace rule?
-
Ok, so what is going on with the brace rule?
If I'm upstanding it right
There's an injunction but it only includes you if you are a member of one of the plaintiff(s) (Firearms Policy Coalition) otherwise starting next Thursday you're a felon if you have a brace and haven't applied for a tax stamp.
-
If I'm upstanding it right
There's an injunction but it only includes you if you are a member of one of the plaintiff(s) (Firearms Policy Coalition) otherwise starting next Thursday you're a felon if you have a brace and haven't applied for a tax stamp.
Well, a brace and a pistol capable of using the brace. Of course, I am not sure if that technicality will matter to the ATF or a jury.
-
Well, a brace and a pistol capable of using the brace. Of course, I am not sure if that technicality will matter to the ATF or a jury.
ATF has since put out "clarification" that owning a brace is intent which is counter to what the director said before congress. I could be wrong but IIRC just having a brace will be illegal. They could word it differently, aka clarify, AGAIN tomorrow.
-
ATF has since put out "clarification" that owning a brace is intent which is counter to what the director said before congress. They could word it differently AGAIN tomorrow.
I heard that. They pretty much said constructive possession is on the table. Most people are suggesting to store any removed braces somewhere else. Then you just have to worry about having a pistol that can easily accept a spare stock that might be in the house.
-
See reply 113
-
ATF has since put out "clarification" that owning a brace is intent which is counter to what the director said before congress. I could be wrong but IIRC just having a brace will be illegal. They could word it differently, aka clarify, AGAIN tomorrow.
I can see a smart attorney referring to the director's sworn testimony in a trial. (He DID say it under oath, didn't he?) Especially if the judge isn't corrupt and allows video of the director's testimony before Congress. So either the director committed perjury, or the other ATF functionaries are lying. Could get pretty messy in court, and entertaining as long as you're not one of the defendants.
Depends on how pissed off they are at the person with that pistol.
If it were me, and I were worried about this issue, I would either mill the pic rail off, or SBR that gun. There's not really anything you can do with that rail EXCEPT put a stock on it so it'd be a PITA to explain in court, even moreso if the owner happened to have a Spear or Vertis in the safe with the stock *right there*. I have no idea how zealous they are going to be with unregistered SBRs and Constructive Possession vis a vis ex-pistols, but if I were a betting man I'd be they aim to make a few examples to scare the normies away from the line.
That type of thinking is what led a lot of people to unnecessarily grind the lugs off their Lugers back in the day. I'd just find something - ANYthing other than a stock or brace - to put on that short length of rail; as others said a sling swivel would do it.
-
Washington Gun Law weighed in, suggesting that it does indeed encompass everyone associated with FPC and Maxim, but no one else. There is still some talk that this only affects people within the geographic boundaries of the 5th Circuit. I'm a bit perplexed how a Federal court could geofence a Federal ruling. If it's federal, then in my layman's perspective, it should apply across the country.
https://youtu.be/q1563ZTnTqE
-
Washington Gun Law weighed in, suggesting that it does indeed encompass everyone associated with FPC and Maxim, but no one else. There is still some talk that this only affects people within the geographic boundaries of the 5th Circuit. I'm a bit perplexed how a Federal court could geofence a Federal ruling. If it's federal, then in my layman's perspective, it should apply across the country.
https://youtu.be/q1563ZTnTqE
There are quite a few instances when different circuits issue conflicting rulings - SCOTUS is more inclined to hear cases where lower courts have basically created different laws for different parts of the country, even when the cases are political hot potatoes.
-
I can see a smart attorney referring to the director's sworn testimony in a trial. (He DID say it under oath, didn't he?) Especially if the judge isn't corrupt and allows video of the director's testimony before Congress. So either the director committed perjury, or the other ATF functionaries are lying. Could get pretty messy in court, and entertaining as long as you're not one of the defendants.
I suspect that any lawyer or judge will tell you that's not how it works. The Director said plenty of times that he wasn't an expert on firearms, or the laws concerning them. Any reasonable court would find that he wasn't committing perjury, he was just mistaken. The rule will continue to mean what it pretty plainly stated until a court or legislation changes it. The ATF Director does not have the ability to change CFR's on a whim, just by saying they mean something different.
-
I suspect that any lawyer or judge will tell you that's not how it works. The Director said plenty of times that he wasn't an expert on firearms, or the laws concerning them. Any reasonable court would find that he wasn't committing perjury, he was just mistaken. The rule will continue to mean what it pretty plainly stated until a court or legislation changes it. The ATF Director does not have the ability to change CFR's on a whim, just by saying they mean something different.
Not a knock on your post, just an observation. I still find it extraordinary that we can have an ATF Director (and thus any gov official in charge of something) who can almost with pride say that they have no expertise in the area they control.
-
Not a knock on your post, just an observation. I still find it extraordinary that we can have an ATF Director (and thus any gov official in charge of something) who can almost with pride say that they have no expertise in the area they control.
I don't find it extraordinary. Seems to be the norm for government nowadays.
-
I suspect that any lawyer or judge will tell you that's not how it works. The Director said plenty of times that he wasn't an expert on firearms, or the laws concerning them. Any reasonable court would find that he wasn't committing perjury, he was just mistaken. The rule will continue to mean what it pretty plainly stated until a court or legislation changes it. The ATF Director does not have the ability to change CFR's on a whim, just by saying they mean something different.
A Director of a Federal agency who has no knowledge or expertise on the subject he's supposed to be directing and whose sworn testimony carries zero weight and who isn't responsible for testifying under oath to things that aren't true should have no title, no job, and (most importantly) no salary.
-
Not a knock on your post, just an observation. I still find it extraordinary that we can have an ATF Director (and thus any gov official in charge of something) who can almost with pride say that they have no expertise in the area they control.
I agree with you. The business school fops will tell you at that level it's all managing people, and you don't need to know the details. That's what middle management is for.
As a middle manager I can tell you if a leader does that to me, it means I can do whatever I want, because they don't know any better.
-
at the local pawn shop, a bunch of guys got call in to collect their braces, the pawn shop had a lot of people getting loans on their guns and they took the brace off themselves and made the owners come in and get them .
At work one of the clients is a gun guy, he walking around telling people they're felons ( if the subject comes up ) most are just saying
"huh, what? , no I bought it at a gun shop and did the background thing, it's legal, they can't arrest everyone"
I don't own one myself but I am betting that eventually ATF shoots themselves in the foot and small barrels will be treated no different than a full size
-
Washington Gun Law weighed in, suggesting that it does indeed encompass everyone associated with FPC and Maxim, but no one else. There is still some talk that this only affects people within the geographic boundaries of the 5th Circuit. I'm a bit perplexed how a Federal court could geofence a Federal ruling. If it's federal, then in my layman's perspective, it should apply across the country.
https://youtu.be/q1563ZTnTqE
There have been many other cases in which different federal circuits have ruled in opposite ways on questions of federal law. That's what's known as a "circuit split," and those are the types of cases the Supreme Court is most likely to take, because they want the law to be the same everywhere. A ruling from the fifth circuit court of appeals isn't binding on judges in any other circuit. It can be cited as persuasive authority, but it isn't binding.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/persuasive_authority
-
Apropos of nothing but my curmudgeonliness (if that's a word), I am getting really irritated with all the guntuber "breaking news!!!!" videos on the brace ban coming out in recent weeks that either actually tell you nothing, or have a headline about "The Brace Ban is Dead!!!", but then talk about some minor "win" that actually amounts to nothing.
Some of these guys are coming out with new videos on it daily, or in some cases multiple times per day, with "Breaking News!!!"
-
Apropos of nothing but my curmudgeonliness (if that's a word), I am getting really irritated with all the guntuber "breaking news!!!!" videos on the brace ban coming out in recent weeks that either actually tell you nothing, or have a headline about "The Brace Ban is Dead!!!", but then talk about some minor "win" that actually amounts to nothing.
Some of these guys are coming out with new videos on it daily, or in some cases multiple times per day, with "Breaking News!!!"
I've noticed a huge increase in click bait YT videos fitting that description recently on pretty much every subject. Everything from guns, history, to science
The below video is mainly focused on this issue when it comes to science videos but it's more than likely the same when it comes to many gun & gun law videos.
YouTube’s Science Scam Crisis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McM3CfDjGs0
-
As an FYI, Neither condemning or endorsing, ATF marked FD-258 Fingerprint cards are available on Amazon, as are ink pads.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0B6GX7DM8
If you choose to register, and you have multiple pistols, it's a lot easier to roll your own fingerprints. You can do the whole Form 1 process from the comfort of your house whereing only Ranger Panties and a plate carrier. (Not just Braced Pistols, but any SBR/SBS/Suppressor.)
You can get them for free from the ATF, but they don't have Prime 1 day shipping. (In fact ATF hasn't filled my order from Jan yet)
-
If you choose to register, and you have multiple pistols, it's a lot easier to roll your own fingerprints. You can do the whole Form 1 process from the comfort of your house whereing only Ranger Panties and a plate carrier. (Not just Braced Pistols, but any SBR/SBS/Suppressor.)
Interestingly, my LGS is advertising appointments to help people fill out a Form 1, not for the amnesty and a free tax stamp, but they are saying for the "normal" Form 1, to do an SBR and pay the $200. I thought there was no difference between doing the Form 1 for a braced pistol and an SBR, but I'm a dummy.
-
As far as I can tell without actually submitting one, it's the same form. You do need to go through their special "Final Rule blahbty blah" site. There's a big red banner on the main login page, but all that seems to do is lock you out of the other available eforms, makes you click tax exempt, and locks you into a SBR* form 1.
FWIW, while they say they may require pics of the weapon, it's optional to submit them with the Form 1. They ask for a close up of any existing engraving on the line item part, but they do that on the tax paid Form 1 as well. There's nothing saying you *HAVE* to give them a picture of the firearm. Do with that what you will.
* It indeed locks you into an SBR form 1. I know there are shotguns out there with pistol braces on them. I wonder if they were all sold under the AOW overall length, or if the ATF just didn't think about them and screwed those owners. (more than they screwed the rest of us.)
-
As an FYI, Neither condemning or endorsing, ATF marked FD-258 Fingerprint cards are available on Amazon, as are ink pads.
As usual, you're a bad influence. Ordered the cards last night, started the application for a couple of pistols and will finish it tonight.
-
I have already bought suppressors through Silencer Shop. I can order finger print cards from them with my prints.
I had always planned to SBR 2 or 3 of my guns. I guess I need to take a closer look at that in June.
-
I had always planned to SBR 2 or 3 of my guns. I guess I need to take a closer look at that in June.
I had planned to SBR my Canebrake for a while now. I first just plain procrastinated, and now just put it off to see what happens with the rule and lawsuits. The rule is almost making me obstinate about not doing it. :laugh:
-
I just plan to submit a Form 1. I am not trying to register anything with a brace. May not make a difference.
Friday, the court clarified that the injunction was good for all FPC members and Maxim Defense customers. Supposedly, they might also get the judge in the GOA case to do the same. That would cover me. Of course, I don't want to depend on that. It would just be nice to know the ATF is not looking to come my way (for a little while).
-
I just plan to submit a Form 1. I am not trying to register anything with a brace. May not make a difference.
Friday, the court clarified that the injunction was good for all FPC members and Maxim Defense customers. Supposedly, they might also get the judge in the GOA case to do the same. That would cover me. Of course, I don't want to depend on that. It would just be nice to know the ATF is not looking to come my way (for a little while).
I could see the ATF saying or at least try to say the injunction only applies to FPC members who were members at the time of the injunction
-
I could see the ATF saying or at least try to say the injunction only applies to FPC members who were members at the time of the injunction
Yeah, the judge did not specify dates from what I heard. If the ATF started going after FPC members and then declining to charge people who were members at that time, would that still be in violation of the injunction? I can't imagine an ATF tactical team showing up at your door demanding your FPC membership card.
-
Well, it's not like they don't already have a complete roster including addresses, next of kin, known associates, blood type, how many dogs they'll have to shoot, IP addresses for uploading kiddie p0rn on your computers, all banking information.....
-
https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1663683097274064896?s=20
FPC has voted to amend their membership policy, so if you join today (or did so any time this year) the effective date of your membership is June 1, 2022. Meaning you will have been a member when the lawsuit was filed.
$20 well spent IMNSHO.
-
Sure, I’m in for $30.
-
Yeah, I'm going to join it regardless. They're doing something, and not just on the brace thing. Where is the NRA?
I'm hearing what I would call rumors right now that the GOA lawsuit will end similar to the FPC one, with GOA members covered as well.
-
John Crump mentioned GOA was asking their judge to issue an injunction referencing the ruling from the FPC case. He seemed pretty confident it would be done. I need to check on my GOA membership. I have given money to FPC before, but not lately. That will have to change.
-
14 hours to go
Do you know where your brace is?
-
https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1663683097274064896?s=20
FPC has voted to amend their membership policy, so if you join today (or did so any time this year) the effective date of your membership is June 1, 2022. Meaning you will have been a member when the lawsuit was filed.
$20 well spent IMNSHO.
Would what is in effect retroactive memberships hold up in court?
-
Once you SBR your braced pistol, can you then just throw away the brace and put a real stock on it?
-
Once you SBR your braced pistol, can you then just throw away the brace and put a real stock on it?
Yep
Threat like you would any other SBR after that.
-
For the reason I am making an SBR, I initially typed in "Forced to because of arbitrary and capricious rulings on the part of the ATF" but remembered I'm supposed to say "All lawful purposes".
-
Did yours go through?
I'm hearing from some guys the site seems to be experiencing traffic related issues.
-
Did yours go through?
I'm hearing from some guys the site seems to be experiencing traffic related issues.
I submitted both of them last night. The first one went right through. The second one had an error when I first tried to submit it but worked the second time around.
I've just got to mail CLEO notifications and fingerprints now.
-
Add another group
Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News
Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News
48 seconds ago
One Update just came in regarding the pistol brace fiasco. Second Amendment Foundation just got word that their members are covered by the injunction in their case as well. Same vagueness applies here that applied to the FPC injunctio
https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxF32L6LZtYXh6g8LfV8qF7Z-wmNpBXVEy
(https://yt3.ggpht.com/UW7ygpTL6vyh6cj-jjf18kECLIWacCo8VaGz7iZ8YX4n_VUIPXq0_YXoBpwVRpeYz2ZCFiJVhnxx4A=s577-nd-v1)
-
Now GOA
ANOTHER Injunction In Pistol Brace Rule Case (GOA)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-qU_eglv80
-
There still seems to be attorney disagreement on if this is just for FPC members in the 5th Circuit or not. Anything like that regarding the other lawsuits? Which court were they presented in?
-
Lets play am I a felon roulette.
I hate the ATF
-
=)
[MechAg94], thank you for your generous support.
And we've automatically entered you into our giveaway.
You are now a member of the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC). Welcome aboard!
Made a donation to GOA also. Even if it doesn't hold up, they are both spending money trying to stop this stuff. I give money to SAF every year so I should have one of their cards around somewhere.
-
There still seems to be attorney disagreement on if this is just for FPC members in the 5th Circuit or not. Anything like that regarding the other lawsuits? Which court were they presented in?
I would suggest still removing braces for the time being. The injunctions are a sign the courts are not taking the ATF's side on this. Just not sure how long it will take for this to shake out.
-
So is today the day the JBT start kicking down doors?
-
Hide your dogs
-
Hide your dogs
Steve is ready for them.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50409875476_8d30fa18af_c.jpg)
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/eba1d187c9d811aed0ad741d7115b616.jpg)
-
Rumor has it only ~250,000 pistol brace stamps have been issued. That leaves well over 10+ million felons out there….
-
Rumor has it only ~250,000 pistol brace stamps have been issued. That leaves well over 10+ million felons out there….
Or 10+ million people who all either removed their braces or put on a longer barrel.
I'm sure EVERYONE who bought a then-legal braced firearm got the word of the retroactive reclassification and the BATmen's disavowal of the bureau's multiple previous written findings to the contrary.
-
Or 10+ million people who all either removed their braces or put on a longer barrel.
Geez….you’re no fun…. =( :laugh:
-
We talked about it in the safety meeting at work yesterday
-
We talked about it in the safety meeting at work yesterday
In the context of "we have all this large equipment that could have armor welded on."?
-
Or 10+ million people who all either removed their braces or put on a longer barrel.
I'll bet those would be low numbers. With the caveat that (pulling the number out of my ass) 75% of "device owners" don't even know about the rule: Those who know of it likely know by now that you have to remove and destroy the brace* or put the longer barrel on. Either one costs money, either via destroying your property or the expense of fitting a new barrel or buying a new upper. I'd be more inclined to bet on non-compliance either as an FU, or to wait for the lawsuits.
* One could also argue that many owners do in fact think you can just remove the brace, since they watched the clip of the guy on the TV versus reading the documentation.
-
Geez….you’re no fun…. =( :laugh:
Fun? You want fun? Consider this: "Nothing's illegal unless you're caught." >:D
(Random thought: I wonder how many BATmen are assigned to reviewing Youtube and other social media websites, looking for old/current/future violations?) [tinfoil]
-
The ATF told The Reload on Friday it has received just over a quarter million applications to register pistol-brace-equipped firearms…
That number represents just a fraction of the braced guns believed to have been sold in the decade since the ATF first classified a version as outside the scope of the NFA. In the impact assessment for the rule, the ATF estimated that three to seven million devices exist. However, the Congressional Research Service puts the number much higher at somewhere between 10 and 40 million.
That puts the registration rate for pistol-brace-equipped guns at between .6 percent and eight percent.
Longnecker noted that owners of the affected guns could also comply with the rule by either dismantling the firearms and destroying the braces or turning them over to the ATF. He said the agency does not know how many Americans may have taken those routes.
Massive Noncompliance: ATF Says Only 250,000 Braced Pistol Owners Registered Their Guns
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/massive-noncompliance-atf-says-only-250000-braced-pistol-owners-registered-their-guns/
As a side note I'm somewhat puzzled by why we can't narrow the number sold down to something better than to 3-7 million or even 10-40 million. A spread of 37 million, really? I'm inclined to believe the lower numbers and think the higher numbers is a highly exaggeration BS number for effect. I'm having a hard time believing there could be upwards of 40 million braces out there.
-
. . . I'm having a hard time believing there could be upwards of 40 million braces out there.
Same here. I've seen enough to recognize that they're "in common use" and can readily believe they number well into the millions. But 40 million?
While there's well north of 20 million AR-pattern firearms out there, I'm sure the preponderance are rifles & carbines. Add in other likely candidates for a brace (AKs, Skorpions, B&T, HK, etc.) and I'd still be surprised if the total of braced pistols reached 40 million - that would mean about 1 in 10 of all privately owned firearms was a braced pistol.
I don't think so.
-
No matter which figure you believe it still means the vast majority of braces were not registered.
3M - 8.3% registered
7M - 3.5%
10M - 2.5%
40M - 0.6 %
-
What catagory were braced pistols transferred under with the 4473s? It could account for not having an accurate count, as well as not having a good number for what stripped lowers get built into.
-
No matter which figure you believe it still means the vast majority of braces were not registered.
3M - 8.3% registered
7M - 3.5%
10M - 2.5%
40M - 0.6 %
Massive non compliance - and IMHO it's not primarily an act of defiance, it's that people don't know that the BATmen went ahead and made a retroactive change to both their interpretation of the law and - seemingly - changed the law itself, non-legislatively. And despite the old adage "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" . . . with all the millions upon millions of words now making up the body of "the law" . . . I'd say it IS an excuse.
Unless all manufacturers provide sales numbers of braces sold (so we can add them up) I don't know how we'd ever come up with even a realistic ballpark estimate of how many are out there. And since braces were not and are not regulated components (like firearm receivers) I don't know if there even ARE comprehensive records to be had.
-
When does the "roundup" start by the BATFE?
-
When does the "roundup" start by the BATFE?
When the ATF agent with the starter pistol shots the dog
-
Is it really mass compliance or is it just that people think you can just remove the brace?
Yeah, they might try to stretch it into modifying the receivers also, but most people think you just remove the brace if they were aware of the rule change at all.
-
If you want to look at the numbers a somewhat different way somewhere between 2,750,000 and 39,750,000 people woke up last Thursday morning freshly minted felons.
Yes I know some people own multiple braces and that messes with the actual numbers but bear with me since they can't even agree on how many braces are even out total. Anywhere from 3-40 million :facepalm:
-
Someone posted this link on another forum
https://www.armslist.com/posts/14552968/louisville-kentucky-handguns-for-sale--mp5k-package
Listed On: Thursday, June 1, 2023
Just a wee bit suspicious
-
Yeah, they might try to stretch it into modifying the receivers also, but most people think you just remove the brace if they were aware of the rule change at all.
That's because the head of the BATFE testified under oath in front of Congress that that's all people have to do to be in compliance.
-
Someone posted this link on another forum
https://www.armslist.com/posts/14552968/louisville-kentucky-handguns-for-sale--mp5k-package
Just a wee bit suspicious
Brace and vertical foregrip. Just a wee bit suspicious is right. ;/
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/IMG_8076.jpg)
-
Apparently all Texans are now covered by an injunction:
https://youtu.be/jisyQVBfa9M
-
So is it safe to remove the brace and throw it on the shelf if you have a registered SBR that you can possibly use it on? Asking for a friend….
-
So is it safe to remove the brace and throw it on the shelf if you have a registered SBR that you can possibly use it on? Asking for a friend….
I suspect that in reality it'll depend on how pissed the gov is at your friend.
If they kick in the door for selling machine gun parts online, or a metal card with a picture on it, and find a pistol brace, and an unregistered pistol that could accept it, I'd bet $20 and a bottle of bourbon they tack a constructive possession charge on the whole thing, regardless of any SBR lowers in the house.
I doubt strongly that they are going door to door with SB Tactical's customer list and checking to make sure everyone cut up their pistol brace.
Barring some other behavior to draw the Eye of Sauron to your house, I'd be pretty surprised if a pistol brace, unmounted, in a closet somewhere got anyone in to trouble with the feds.
If I were to Red Team this, and I was a shitty Revenuer, I would have my guys watching rumble vids and cruising Reddit for someone that I could pin a white supremacy/proud boys/creepy porn tag on who is also talking a big non compliance game online. A flashy tac team raid on some scary domestic terrorists with dangerous unregistered SBRs is exactly what is needed to get the normies riled up and on the cop's side. Raiding a suburban dad who bought a short AR in 2020 at Cabela's or Bass Pro and capping the family labradoodle isn't going to have the same punch on Twitter.
-
Epoch Times reports that fewer than 10% of braced pistols have been registered per the BATFE's "amnesty":
https://www.theepochtimes.com/less-than-10-percent-of-pistol-braces-registered-with-atf-by-deadline_5310748.html
Not surprised in the least.
-
I think a lot of them were taken off or destroyed. It seems like if you hadn't already waded into the NFA game a lot of people felt it was too much hassle.
At least anecdotally I know 4 or 5 folks that asked me about this over the last couple months and when faced with getting fingerprints and pictures and all that either sold the guns privately or took the brace off.
-
I suspect that in reality it'll depend on how pissed the gov is at your friend.
I think Dogmush called it on how they would enforce it. That said, I suppose if you're a "small fry" who keeps his head down, having one legal SBR to associate with all your "spare braces" might help you in the low probability event of the ATF knocking at your door.
-
A new thought occured to me this morning. The "amnesty" form 1 exempts you from having to engrave the firearm as the "maker". ATF let's you just use the existing manufacturers marks on the lower.
So theoretically there's a quarter million registered SBRs floating around with no indication that they are, in fact, registered SBRs. What happens when those things start trickling back into the secondary market? technically they need to be transferred on a Form 4 with a tax paid, but AR's being AR's there's no guarantee that they will even still have short barrels on them in 10 or 15 years when the registered owner kicks the bucket and their widow sells the collection.
Especially if the rule gets overturned, and braced pistols are suddenly gust normal title i firearms again. Except for the quarter million that are SBRs for no reason.
-
A new thought occured to me this morning. The "amnesty" form 1 exempts you from having to engrave the firearm as the "maker". ATF let's you just use the existing manufacturers marks on the lower.
So theoretically there's a quarter million registered SBRs floating around with no indication that they are, in fact, registered SBRs. What happens when those things start trickling back into the secondary market? technically they need to be transferred on a Form 4 with a tax paid, but AR's being AR's there's no guarantee that they will even still have short barrels on them in 10 or 15 years when the registered owner kicks the bucket and their widow sells the collection.
Especially if the rule gets overturned, and braced pistols are suddenly gust normal title i firearms again. Except for the quarter million that are SBRs for no reason.
I guess you could run the SN but
1) How many even know to check?
2) Knowing the govt they'll turn checking into a 6 month jump through flaming hoops process.
3) How many would even bother even if it wasn't a 6 month process?
-
I have never gone the SBR route before. Do you have to engrave something on the gun when you do that?
Edited since I left a critical word out.
-
I've noticed that many critics of me going the bullpup route to avoid dealing with BS like this for a short compact rifle have been quiet lately.
-
So theoretically there's a quarter million registered SBRs floating around with no indication that they are, in fact, registered SBRs. What happens when those things start trickling back into the secondary market? technically they need to be transferred on a Form 4 with a tax paid, but AR's being AR's there's no guarantee that they will even still have short barrels on them in 10 or 15 years when the registered owner kicks the bucket and their widow sells the collection.
If the weapon is transferred in a non-SBR condition it is by legal definition no longer an SBR anymore, right? Sure, the ATF might wish you had let them know, and the new owner couldn't put it in SBR configuration without a new Form 1, but SBRs are not a "once a machine gun, always a machine gun" situation.
-
I've noticed that many critics of me going the bullpup route to avoid dealing with BS like this for a short compact rifle have been quiet lately.
Are any of your bullpups any cheaper than an AR+tax stamp?
-
The Kel-tec RDB is cheaper than a lot of AR's. Might depend on whether it was on sale or not. Stuff like the Steyr Aug are cheaper than Daniel Defense or Geissele, but that is up there.
-
I guess you could run the SN but
1) How many even know to check?
2) Knowing the govt they'll turn checking into a 6 month jump through flaming hoops process.
3) How many would even bother even if it wasn't a 6 month process?
I'm not sure "running the serial number" runs it through the NFA registry under normal circumstances. That's not a database LE usually checks for stolen guns, although I confess I don't know exactly how the various state and local databases intersect.
I have gone the SBR route before. Do you have to engrave something on the gun when you do that?
Ummmm.......Yes.
When you Form 1 an existing lower into an SBR you are "making" a Title II Firearm, and as the maker are required to engrave your name and city/state onto the firearm. You can use the Model and serial number that the original manufacturer engraved into the Title I firearm.
*As an aside, if you Form 1 a silencer from scratch, or an 80% lower, you aren't the "maker", but rather the "Original Manufacturer" and have to engrave name, city/state, model number and SN on the new Title II firearm. All text size and engraving depth requirements that are listed in 27 CFR 479.102
-
Are any of your bullpups any cheaper than an AR+tax stamp?
Lets not go there :P
But I don't think I've paid more than $1,600 for one except maybe for the Tavor 7. Many ARs get into in that price range. Heck you can get a KT RDB for ~$800.
But
I avoid a lot of govt BS (example this thread)
I can take it out of state without asking for permission
Full length barrel which is huge plus for me. More vel and less muzzle flash and blast.
I like the balance especially with a loaded mag.
I helped a friend built a 7.5" AR and afterwards we compared it to my 16" barreled MSAR (AUG clone) and there was only 1/4" difference in total length.
But to each their own.
-
I guess you could run the SN but
1) How many even know to check?
2) Knowing the govt they'll turn checking into a 6 month jump through flaming hoops process.
3) How many would even bother even if it wasn't a 6 month process?
I'm not sure "running the serial number" runs it through the NFA registry under normal circumstances. That's not a database LE usually checks for stolen guns, although I confess I don't know exactly how the various state and local databases intersect.
Yeah, I don't know. Not sure how the ATF works in that regard
-
If the weapon is transferred in a non-SBR condition it is by legal definition no longer an SBR anymore, right? Sure, the ATF might wish you had let them know, and the new owner couldn't put it in SBR configuration without a new Form 1, but SBRs are not a "once a machine gun, always a machine gun" situation.
I don't think so. Once it's registered, it's an SBR until the owner submits a letter requesting it's removal from the Registry. Even if you (for some reason) put a long barrel on your SBR/SBS it's still on the registry as an SBR unless you specifically ask for it to be removed. You are supposed to tell them if you change barrel length or OAL though.
-
I avoid a lot of govt BS (example this thread)
For now anyway.
-
For now anyway.
Yeah I know but I'll cross that bridge if and when we get there.
2024 is just around the corner
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/l4FATJpd4LWgeruTK/giphy.gif)
-
Wonder if anyone in the government is taking notes on how this could possibly indicate how a full on gun turn in would go?
-
Wonder if anyone in the government is taking notes on how this could possibly indicate how a full on gun turn in would go?
I'm sure they are, but I suspect their take away is not what we'd like it to be.
-
I'm sure they are, but I suspect their take away is not what we'd like it to be.
Yeah like we're gonna need more dog targets for the fed gun ranges
-
Looking on the bright side, what with all our old MRAPs and APCs going to the Ukraine there's less available for the feds to 1033 and use on us.
-
Looking on the bright side, what with all our old MRAPs and APCs going to the Ukraine there's less available for the feds to 1033 and use on us.
And for the feds to give away to local PDs and county sheriffs' offices ...
-
Looking on the bright side, what with all our old MRAPs and APCs going to the Ukraine there's less available for the feds to 1033 and use on us.
Brandon gave a lot to the Taliban as well. (On the bright side, I just read that they're currently massing on the Iranian border - seems the Afghan Taliban and Iranian mullahs don't play well together. So maybe they'll be put to good use after all.)
-
Here's Sheila Jackson Lee on why braces should be banned
Apparently they cause mass shootings
And make guns automatic... or something :facepalm:
https://twitter.com/NatlGunRights/status/1668721399773503489
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee explains why stabilizing braces should be banned
https://twitchy.com/brettt/2023/06/13/rep-sheila-jackson-lee-explains-why-stabilizing-braces-should-be-banned-n2384490
I think I got brain cancer from watching that.
And people vote for her :facepalm:
-
Brandon weighs in:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1670077926543597568
-
Brandon weighs in:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1670077926543597568
We just saw incompetence and dementia collide.
-
Brandon weighs in:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1670077926543597568
This is worse than "the thing that goes up" . . .
-
Attaching a brace changes the caliber of the firearm? Wow.
(ETA: https://twitter.com/MAC_Arms/status/1670408561623547904 )
-
Does anyone have a list of what braces do? If not, I'll get it started.
A) makes pistols fully automatic
B) makes a pistol into a gun
C) increases caliber
I've only recently become aware of the benefits of these wonder-devices, and I must say, I'm impressed.
-
Navy should have put braces on the Iowas. That way they could have one shot killed the Yamatos.
-
Navy should have put braces on the Iowas. That way they could have one shot killed the Yamatos.
Actually, the US Army Air force got them first and strapped a couple to B-29s. And now you know ... the rest of the story.
-
Actually, the US Army Air force got them first and strapped a couple to B-29s. And now you know ... the rest of the story.
The B-52 is just a B-25 with multiple pistol braces installed.
-
DUDE, how do I post a GIF?
Give a woman a pistol brace or two
(https://media.tenor.com/1-GtDuoH7MoAAAAd/aliens-exosuit-ripley.gif)
-
Disregard my ignorance!
-
Back in the 1960s someone at NASA attached a brace to a sounding rocket and thus the Saturn V was born. The rest is history.
-
Does anyone have a list of what braces do? If not, I'll get it started.
A) makes pistols fully automatic
B) makes a pistol into a gun
C) increases caliber
I've only recently become aware of the benefits of these wonder-devices, and I must say, I'm impressed.
It better not make it a caliber I don't already load for.
-
Does anyone have a list of what braces do? If not, I'll get it started.
A) makes pistols fully automatic
B) makes a pistol into a gun
C) increases caliber
I've only recently become aware of the benefits of these wonder-devices, and I must say, I'm impressed.
Actually . . . referring to A) . . .
The military version of H&K's VP70 had a detachable shoulder stock (kind of shaped like some braces) that had "Da Switch" on it; attaching the stock and flipping "Da Switch" converted the pistol to three-shot burst mode.
-
Actually . . . referring to A) . . .
The military version of H&K's VP70 had a detachable shoulder stock (kind of shaped like some braces) that had "Da Switch" on it; attaching the stock and flipping "Da Switch" converted the pistol to three-shot burst mode.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEMTx5MNqk4
-
Enter Chuck Schumer on why braces should be banned
Senator Schumer on the Biden Pistol Ban: "If you have ever seen a gunman fire what looks like a machinegun with just one hand, that's what pistol braces allow you to do." 😵💫 pic.twitter.com/3BVY8mn5Cn
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) June 22, 2023
https://twitchy.com/brettt/2023/06/22/chuck-schumer-says-pistol-braces-allow-you-to-shoot-like-a-machine-gun-with-one-hand-n2384767
Yeah.....
-
I'm tired of politicians refusing to just come out and tell the public exactly how dangerous these ghost pistol braces are. It's time for Biden to just man up, and declassify the tapes of pistol brace killing the dinosaurs. (And ending net neutrality.)
-
So HJ44, to halt the pistol rule and which (barely) passed in the house, failed in the senate, 49-51. The dems they were hoping to get, Manchin and Tester, stuck with their party instead. If only one of them had crossed the aisle, Harris would have kiboshed it, so they needed both but got neither.
Of course we all know, and Brandon had made it clear, that he would veto it anyway, but I think we can forget about stuff like this going through congress regardless of who is president. It's gonna be lawsuits and court rulings. Lawmakers are worthless.
-
Lawmakers are worthless.
Quoted for truth.
-
It better not make it a caliber I don't already load for.
You load 16" Mk 8s?
-
So HJ44, to halt the pistol rule and which (barely) passed in the house, failed in the senate, 49-51. The dems they were hoping to get, Manchin and Tester, stuck with their party instead. If only one of them had crossed the aisle, Harris would have kiboshed it, so they needed both but got neither.
Of course we all know, and Brandon had made it clear, that he would veto it anyway, but I think we can forget about stuff like this going through congress regardless of who is president. It's gonna be lawsuits and court rulings. Lawmakers are worthless.
It failed 49-50. Sen Coons was absent due to "precautionary medical tests".
bob
-
I really don't know why some GOP members consider Manchin the next best thing to sliced bread - once in a while he votes for what's good for America, but more often than not, he doesn't.
-
I really don't know why some GOP members consider Manchin the next best thing to sliced bread - once in a while he votes for what's good for America, but more often than not, he doesn't.
The fact that he isn't 100% in party lockstep and sometimes is willing to break ranks for his constituents is notable and laudable.
-
He sometimes sides with the people who voted for him. That's damning with faint praise.
-
I'm sure the .06% of brace owners that apparently care about this rule are upset by this vote.
-
I'm sure the .06% of brace owners that apparently care about this rule are upset by this vote.
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/x383/WLJohnson1/Screenshot_20230620-160623_Instagram.jpg)
-
If I'm understanding this right basically the NRA tried to jump in late probably so that they could take credit. Judge slapped them down.
Federal Judge Denies NRA From Intervening In ATF Pistol Brace Lawsuit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wT4eRRAOOo
-
It's the NRA, so they were probably trying to file on the ATF's side. No one has ever seen a wood pistol brace.
-
What I heard is they were jumping in trying to get an injunction to apply to all NRA members. It sounded to me like the judge told them "too little, too late" and denied it.
-
For the reason I am making an SBR, I initially typed in "Forced to because of arbitrary and capricious rulings on the part of the ATF" but remembered I'm supposed to say "All lawful purposes".
Got the first approval for my AR9. Still waiting on my other one.
Guess I get to buy some real stocks now.
Kind of surprised they took the fingerprints that I rolled myself.
-
That's a long time for a eForm 1. I wonder what the "normal" thruput is and if that 250,000 was a significant dump of forms for them.
-
That's a long time for a eForm 1. I wonder what the "normal" thruput is and if that 250,000 was a significant dump of forms for them.
I submitted it at the last possible moment, so I am probably one of the last ones to get mine looked at.
Also my first eForm. My last paper suppressor transfer was around 12 months so I was quite happy.
Dogmush, do you have an SBR stock you like? I'm mostly into Magpul CTRs for my AR stocks but I'm open to other options since I'm sure there is some new hotness I haven't kept up with.
-
I like the Magpul SL series. I think the lock is a good improvement over the CTR double lever setup and mine are tight enough I don't miss the friction lock at all. For an SBR, I lean towards the SL-K or SL-M as they are a little shorter and smaller it's just annoying you have to buy an adapter if you want a QD cup.
I have a Viltor EMOD on my MK12 which is a really nice stock, but it reminds me that it's pretty hard for the fancy $100 stocks to be twice as good as a $45 Magpul.
I have seen and shouldered, but not shot yet, the newish Reptilia RECC-E and it is really cool, light and comfortable. You might look at that if you want to spend some money.
-
As an FYI on approval times, I just got a suppressor stamp in 8 months or so. Mid-January to early August. Got an email with the attached paperwork from the eforms website. No paper with the actual stamp.
-
As an FYI on approval times, I just got a suppressor stamp in 8 months or so. Mid-January to early August. Got an email with the attached paperwork from the eforms website. No paper with the actual stamp.
Yeah eForm 4's are still running 8-10 months. I had been getting my eForm1's in 14-30 days as recently as last march. I haven't dropped one since this whole pistol brace rodeo started, but 3 months used to be a long time for eForm 1's
-
What's the expected turn around of which-ever form for a suppressor using an outfit like Silencer Shop?
I'm still considering picking one up for my Ruger American Rimfire.
-
What's the expected turn around of which-ever form for a suppressor using an outfit like Silencer Shop?
I'm still considering picking one up for my Ruger American Rimfire.
From what I've seen most are around eight months.
But the sooner you start the timer, the sooner you'll get through it. You definitely need one. If you never buy another suppressor, you at least need a decent one for .22LR.
-
What's the expected turn around of which-ever form for a suppressor using an outfit like Silencer Shop?
I'm still considering picking one up for my Ruger American Rimfire.
In the last two years, all individual....
My Sandman (last paper Form 4 I did) took right at 14 months.
The Nomad took 9 months (Jun14 22-Mar 9-23)
The RC2 took 7.5 months (Sep 2 22- Apr 14 23)
The 3 I dropped in Jun this year are obviously still pending
The Official ATF Eform4-Indv wait time is 190 days, while Silencer Shop's tracking of their kiosks say 8 days to 8 months, with 6 months being the median.
-
Oh, I totally forgot, I also dropped a Form 4 on a Rugged Razor on Feb 23 2023. That one's at 184 days and counting, so it should be coming out pretty soon.
Yes, I have a problem. I have a problem with loud guns. :cool:
And the Rugged came back yesterday, so 189 days.
-
I'm still considering picking one up for my Ruger American Rimfire.
Just get it. You won't regret it. The sooner you order the sooner it will arrive.
-
Still waiting on one SBR approval despite both being filed the same evening. I put an SL-K on the one that was approved (thanks dogmush).
-
The fact that he isn't 100% in party lockstep and sometimes is willing to break ranks for his constituents is notable and laudable.
I could say much the same about a broken clock because it's right twice a day.
-
What's the expected turn around of which-ever form for a suppressor using an outfit like Silencer Shop?
I'm still considering picking one up for my Ruger American Rimfire.
My 8 month approval was using Silencer Shop. Once you are set up with them, the fingerprints, photos, and paperwork are all done once and you don't do much of anything after that. Just set up a username on eForms to sign off on the forms electronically. Makes it real easy. I got an email from eForms with the tax stamp paperwork once it was approved.
As others said, it will take time, but don't wait to get the approval started. 22 LR suppressors are great fun. With a bolt action, you just hear the firing pin hit and the impact on the target. For me, standard velocity ammo generally stays subsonic.
-
Still waiting on one SBR approval despite both being filed the same evening. I put an SL-K on the one that was approved (thanks dogmush).
Second one just came through approved. Almost a two week difference between two registrations the same evening. Weird.
-
These breaking news videos drive me a little nuts, but apparently COB this Friday is going to be a critical date on whether a nationwide injunction will be ordered or not and also if the FPC, et. al. injunction will continue or not if no nationwide is ordered.
https://youtu.be/WVieuQrcs3s
-
So the first FPC injunction (60 days) ended on Saturday. As of today, the 5th Circuit has reinstated the injunction, just for FPC and Maxim, but in perpetuity. It's expected that a second case will do the same for GOA members.
Apparently the judge did not make it nationwide because there is a separate case specifically addressing a nationwide injunction, and he didn't want to expand the scope of this one, giving the DOJ ammo against us.
https://youtu.be/L4QFgS6zJL4
It was also interesting that the judge defended braces as "safety devices".
This video suggests that SBRs as NFA items could disappear, and you'll buy one at the gun store just like any other rifle:
https://youtu.be/7a5ec1grghk
-
I haven't heard anything on this for a while, but apparently SB Tactical is expecting a big loss for the ATF and they have just dropped a new brace - their SBA5. I'm still not altogether sure that it's not an April Fools thing. :laugh:
https://youtu.be/0Km9bZQY0rk
-
I haven't heard anything on this for a while, but apparently SB Tactical is expecting a big loss for the ATF and they have just dropped a new brace - their SBA5. I'm still not altogether sure that it's not an April Fools thing. :laugh:
https://youtu.be/0Km9bZQY0rk
I notice that the guy in the link has put the brace on a full sized rifle, not a pistol with a short barrel. So the rifle - which looks like it comfortably remains over the SBR threshold for OAL - stays a rifle.
-
I notice that the guy in the link has put the brace on a full sized rifle, not a pistol with a short barrel. So the rifle - which looks like it comfortably remains over the SBR threshold for OAL - stays a rifle.
That's a Foxtrot Mike Gen 2 12.3" pistol. Even if that KeyMo brake is pinned and welded it ain't 16".
-
Yeah, looked a bit short for a 16" to me.
-
In truth, I think it's great that the pistol "brace" market has so normalized SBR length barrels on ARs that in media and pics a lot of folks think that 12.5"-14.5" is the "normal" length for an AR Rifle.
Common Use indeed.
-
https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-judge-exempts-nra-members-new-gun-rule-1886261
Is it too late to join the NRA again? Major ruling against the ATF.
-
https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-judge-exempts-nra-members-new-gun-rule-1886261
Is it too late to join the NRA again? Major ruling against the ATF.
Join the Firearms Policy Coalition instead. You will be retroactively protected by a much better organization (disgruntled NRA Endowment Member here).
-
Join the Firearms Policy Coalition instead. You will be retroactively protected by a much better organization (disgruntled NRA Endowment Member here).
+ 100
I joined FPC and still give money to GOA on occasion. My Lifetime NRA (I never fell for the upgrade) just kind of sits there. Maybe with Wayne gone things will get better as far as optics but I will probably make the celestial transfer before that happens.
bob
-
Maybe with Wayne gone things will get better as far as optics but I will probably make the celestial transfer before that happens.
bob
Given that the board gave Wayne a multi-million dollar "consulting" gig like five minutes after he left, I do not have high hopes. Seems like the entire board and most of upper management need to take a hike, but for the board at least, they keep getting voted back in.