ATF issues rule change proposal regarding pistol braces

[pinefd]

Everyone bought braced pistols to skirt NFA and the SBR process.

Certainly, not "everyone". In my case, being somewhat new to all of this stuff, I bought my braced pistol in good faith a few years ago, really knowing nothing about the NFA and SBRs and the history of braced pistols. All I knew was that after purchasing a carbine length AR and really enjoying that, I saw a bunch of (perfectly legal) braced pistols at my LGS and thought, "hey cool, a compact version of an AR...I think I'll buy one!"

Oh, and incidentally, I've actually been using the brace as an actual brace lately, after having had three surgeries over the past year on my support hand. And now my wrist is all screwed up to boot, which sure takes a lot of the fun out of shooting (and just about everything else) lately.


Frank

 

[42!]

Lol in this case the ATF literally invited people (for years, mind you) to practically drive a freight train full of guns around the rule when they started issuing determinations X years ago that basically said "the brace is intended for this, but if you use it to shoulder the pistol like a rifle we don't care, as long as it wasnt primarily designed for that purpose" That was literally prevailing doctrine from the tech branch for YEARS espoused in determination letters and other things. This wasnt some guy attaching pistol braces to guns in his basement either btw, it was the
ENTIRE INDUSTRY, every major AR manufacturer has sold braced pistols in the past however many years, legally.

Also that jury you speak of is gonna be kinda conflicted when the defense shows the jury that the ATF has contradicted itself on this issue no less than 3 times in the past 15-20 years.

Fundamentally, I agree with you, but it wasn't "gun owners trying to get around the lawrs" that actually caused this problem, that was just a side effect. It was the ATF that caused it by reneging on its previously long held, long time positions because it was getting lazy and didn't want to hire people to keep filing Form1s for them.

But nobody here wants to hear that when this all started it was a No from the ATF. They start their history in the middle when they changed their mind and went with the "as long as you don't shoulder it".
Now they want it rolled back, but only so far. Imagine they get a judge to say OK, we're rolling it all back to the original determination and that sticks until the law gets changed. Then no one will want it rolled back.

It's all a CF, and yup the ATF started it by changing their mind. Would have been better if they staid with the original determination and the law itself got changed.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Or at least should be.

And this is why you fight the law and not try to wiggle around the rule. Find a way around the rule and they just close that door with another rule. Change the law and you take that option away from them completely.

And it easy for them to prove a brace can and is being used as a stock, heck, the same people who go on about how it's not a stock post videos of themselves using it as a stock. It's not some people's idea of proof but it's more than enough proof for a jury.

 

[Bt74]

But nobody here wants to hear that when this all started it was a No from the ATF. They start their history in the middle when they changed their mind and went with the "as long as you don't shoulder it".
Now they want it rolled back, but only so far. Imagine they get a judge to say OK, we're rolling it all back to the original determination and that sticks until the law gets changed. Then no one will want it rolled back.

It's all a CF, and yup the ATF started it by changing their mind. Would have been better if they staid with the original determination and the law itself got changed.

And why does anyone need a semi automatic?

 

[Bt74]

Better 20 million ignore them, and do not comply, than sell out for a free $200 tax stamp. It wouldn't be like to ATF to go back and make a determination that waiving the tax was actually not legal, and all those skinflints now own REGISTERED illegal firearms???? You folks really trust the ATF???

 

[Mountain]

Better 20 million ignore them, and do not comply, than sell out for a free $200 tax stamp. It wouldn't be like to ATF to go back and make a determination that waiving the tax was actually not legal, and all those skinflints now own REGISTERED illegal firearms???? You folks really trust the ATF???

Sure, and while they're doing that they can go to all the states requiring registration of firearms and simply look for ANY AR-based pistols. I bet commie states would be more than happy to share registration info with the feds. ATF can strong-arm for records the pistol brace companies and retailers who sold pistol braces as well as any firearm manufacturers who offered a braced AR pistol. Unless you bought one for cash at a gun show you are fooked. You don't think they'll first go after everyone assumed to be saying "F-U ATF" before they round up those who followed their orders? They are coming after EVERYONE but they'll want to make examples of non-compliers first. I bet they have been planning this for years and that's why we had the ammo shortage and why local PD's have all those Bearcat military vehicles. Get those pooches armored up.



Nonsense aside, I doubt they would do it but it is more likely the ATF comes back with a "you owe us $200 for the stamp" than attempting to deem a registered SBR is illegal because of a pistol brace. Simply removing the brace makes the AR pistol legal, so unless they raid your house like Waco and find a brace on a pistol how exactly are they going to enforce anything? IMHO given the recent court decision they are going to tread a little carefully on this issue.

I'm gonna wager that anyone arm flapping over this has never registered a SBR.

 

[Bt74]

Sure, and while they're doing that they can go to all the states requiring registration of firearms and simply look for ANY AR-based pistols. I bet commie states would be more than happy to share registration info with the feds. ATF can strong-arm for records the pistol brace companies and retailers who sold pistol braces as well as any firearm manufacturers who offered a braced AR pistol. Unless you bought one for cash at a gun show you are fooked. You don't think they'll first go after everyone assumed to be saying "F-U ATF" before they round up those who followed their orders? They are coming after EVERYONE but they'll want to make examples of non-compliers first. I bet they have been planning this for years and that's why we had the ammo shortage and why local PD's have all those Bearcat military vehicles. Get those pooches armored up.

View attachment 756776

Nonsense aside, I doubt they would do it but it is more likely the ATF comes back with a "you owe us $200 for the stamp" than attempting to deem a registered SBR is illegal because of a pistol brace. Simply removing the brace makes the AR pistol legal, so unless they raid your house like Waco and find a brace on a pistol how exactly are they going to enforce anything? IMHO given the recent court decision they are going to tread a little carefully on this issue.

I'm gonna wager that anyone arm flapping over this has never registered a SBR.

I'm $600 into stamps, but I'm not going to participate in this scam to save a few bucks. Maybe the "I WILL Comply" crowd should just sell some guns at the next "Buy Back" so they can afford a REAL stamp?

 

[240Geezer]

But nobody here wants to hear that when this all started it was a No from the ATF. They start their history in the middle when they changed their mind and went with the "as long as you don't shoulder it".
Now they want it rolled back, but only so far. Imagine they get a judge to say OK, we're rolling it all back to the original determination and that sticks until the law gets changed. Then no one will want it rolled back.

It's all a CF, and yup the ATF started it by changing their mind. Would have been better if they staid with the original determination and the law itself got changed.

Which law would the courts want to change?
None of this is "law" period full stop.
Arbitrary rules by a taxing authority are not laws.

 

[42!]

Which law would the courts want to change?
None of this is "law" period full stop.
Arbitrary rules by a taxing authority are not laws.

That's my point, stop the BS about rules and how to get around them. Go after the underlying law and take the ability away.

 

[heck ya beaches]

reminder for people that told the ATF that their pistols are now rifles: you now cannot legally keep that firearm loaded in your car.

the ATF/gov wants to get away with this gamble to push people and manufacturers towards longer barrels. then it's on to bullpups because this is clearly about reducing the likelihood of rifle calibers in confined spaced -- like the homes of citizens that abide by laws.

 

[240Geezer]

The ATF can piss up rope. Go chase bootleggers and tobacco tax cheats.
Leave me and muh dog be.

 

[Mountain]

reminder for people that told the ATF that their pistols are now rifles: you now cannot legally keep that firearm loaded in your car.

That will vary by state and won't apply to all.

 

[heck ya beaches]

That will vary by state and won't apply to all.

MA, NH at least.

 

[hunt4riches]

Better 20 million ignore them, and do not comply, than sell out for a free $200 tax stamp. It wouldn't be like to ATF to go back and make a determination that waiving the tax was actually not legal, and all those skinflints now own REGISTERED illegal firearms???? You folks really trust the ATF???

wouldn't even need to be the ATF, the AG could pull a Super-Healey or Biden could issue an EO...

 

[MAJoe]

MA, NH at least.

You weren’t carrying a loaded AR pistol in your car either in MA legally. They’re all fixed mag in MA anyway which makes it probably the dumbest gun to carry.

 

[drgrant]

wouldn't even need to be the ATF, the AG could pull a Super-Healey or Biden could issue an EO...

Which would result in the same thing happening which is.... absolutely nothing. Just creating more paper felons.

 

[PappyM3]

You weren’t carrying a loaded AR pistol in your car either in MA legally. They’re all fixed mag in MA anyway which makes it probably the dumbest gun to carry.

There are some preban AR pistols.

 

[heck ya beaches]

You weren’t carrying a loaded AR pistol in your car either in MA legally. They’re all fixed mag in MA anyway which makes it probably the dumbest gun to carry.

Well thank god I don't live in MA then, right? Telling the ATF that your pistol is now an SBR is a bigger headache for travel than I think people realized when they bit the cheese in the trap. It will also be super funny when people then try to sell the pistols they registered as SBRs.

 

[allen-1]

You weren’t carrying a loaded AR pistol in your car either in MA legally. They’re all fixed mag in MA anyway which makes it probably the dumbest gun to carry.

He may not be - but I do at home in GA. It’s a perfect truck gun and I can cross state lines into un-restricted states such as FL and SC with it because it’s a pistol.

With am arm brace, a red dot and 29 rounds of 5.56. Excellent truck gun.

 

[drgrant]

1

Well thank god I don't live in MA then, right? Telling the ATF that your pistol is now an SBR is a bigger headache for travel than I think people realized when they bit the cheese in the trap. It will also be super funny when people then try to sell the pistols they registered as SBRs.

What people don't realize is that many thousands of these things were sold especially in the past two to three years..... most of them are /never/ getting registered... if only, because the average gun owner doesn't even know this is going on..... the only thing they /might/ notice is when they step into a gun shop there's no more AR pistols on the wall.....

 

[42!]

reminder for people that told the ATF that their pistols are now rifles: you now cannot legally keep that firearm loaded in your car.

the ATF/gov wants to get away with this gamble to push people and manufacturers towards longer barrels. then it's on to bullpups because this is clearly about reducing the likelihood of rifle calibers in confined spaced -- like the homes of citizens that abide by laws.

Why not? Not everyone lives in MA

 

[hunt4riches]

Which would result in the same thing happening which is.... absolutely nothing. Just creating more paper felons.

 

[hunt4riches]

1
What people don't realize is that many thousands of these things were sold especially in the past two to three years..... most of them are /never/ getting registered... if only, because the average gun owner doesn't even know this is going on..... the only thing they /might/ notice is when they step into a gun shop there's no more AR pistols on the wall.....

wallhack is to just throw a 16" upper on it (and use 12" upper when no one is looking). All the cool kids shot temporary SBR's long before pistol braces even existed. Pistol braces = "honey I swear I'll pull out" and then you actually do...

 

[heck ya beaches]

Why not? Not everyone lives in MA

Even in NH, you legally cannot have a loaded rifle in your car or on your ATV.

 

[NHKevin]

18 USC 921 (the law) reads in part: “The term ‘rifle’ means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.”

So if a brace remakes a weapon so it’s designed to be fired from the shoulder, and you both agree that many (most?) braces are so designed, then the LAW didn’t need changing to fix the butthurt. The ATF created the loophole with its original rulings, and now ATF is trying to close it.

IMO, it’s a stupid law, and should be repealed and/or struck down, but that’s a different soapbox.

Inserting the buffer tube into your butthole doesn't make it a butt plug or a dildo.

Just because you can shoulder something, that doesn't mean it's designed to be fired from the shoulder.

 

[heck ya beaches]

Inserting the buffer tube into your butthole doesn't make it a butt plug or a dildo.

*confused ATF noises*

 

[240Geezer]

Even in NH, you legally cannot have a loaded rifle in your car or on your ATV.

I believe that's true but I couldn't find it anywhere last night as virtually all references concerned pistols.

 

[heck ya beaches]

I believe that's true but I couldn't find it anywhere last night as virtually all references concerned pistols.

Not the best source but:

"However, the carrying of loaded rifles or shotguns in a moving motor vehicle is prohibited unless the individual is in the act of protecting his or her livestock or crops." - https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/new-hampshire-gun-laws-what-you-need-to-know/

I don't know if people realized that telling the ATF that your CZ Scorpion Micro or S&W MP15-22 identifies as an SBR means you better not cross the bridge from NH to Maine with it. Or leave them with a mag seated with even a single round in it during transport. Or that selling it without form 4 transfers is a big ol' no-no. Or that now your pistol has to be 922r compliant.

Not only does this overreach threaten a bunch of good, ordinary people with felonies for not removing braces, it also opened a door for problems for people that complied with the ATF's overreach.

 

[strangenh]

1) In NH, loaded means round in chamber, ready to fire
2) NH's defnition of rifle does not depend on federal law/rules/sketches-on-envelopes