User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/13/2023 8:02:05 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: What would be great would be if the court finds it unconstitutional to define the barrel length that determines a "rifle" and orders AFT to refund all tax payments accrued since the inception of the NFA. ETA: AND, expunge all records of registrations. I know....dreaming....but if yer gonna dream....  Just imagine how much $$$ that would be! I've been seeing retailers selling guns and kits with braces lately as well. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 11/13/2023 8:17:39 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATH223: Just imagine how much $$$ that would be! I've been seeing retailers selling guns and kits with braces lately as well. Yep, just got a sales flyer in my email from PSA and the pistols are again sporting braces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2023 8:28:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: lazyengineer]
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATH223: Just imagine how much $$$ that would be! I've been seeing retailers selling guns and kits with braces lately as well. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATH223: Originally Posted By s4s4u: What would be great would be if the court finds it unconstitutional to define the barrel length that determines a "rifle" and orders AFT to refund all tax payments accrued since the inception of the NFA. ETA: AND, expunge all records of registrations. I know....dreaming....but if yer gonna dream.... Just imagine how much $$$ that would be! I've been seeing retailers selling guns and kits with braces lately as well. THAT is profound. I'd ask for confirmation names, but really - please don't. But at your word, to confirm, you are seeing a dealer executing transfers of complete firearms sold as pistols, with a brace on it? More than one? That's actually pretty huge if dealers are actually starting to do that again.. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2023 10:00:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: KitBuilder]
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lazyengineer: THAT is profound. I'd ask for confirmation names, but really - please don't. But at your word, to confirm, you are seeing a dealer executing transfers of complete firearms sold as pistols, with a brace on it? More than one? That's actually pretty huge if dealers are actually starting to do that again.. ...with "Magpul BTR Pistol Stabilizing Brace." But yeah, maybe good luck getting your local FFL to transfer it as a Handgun?  I'm sure some will. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2023 10:09:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: lazyengineer]
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KitBuilder: It's the Daily Deal. First page here: https://palmettostatearmory.com/ar-15/ar15-guns/pistols.html ...with "Magpul BTR Pistol Stabilizing Brace." Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KitBuilder: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: THAT is profound. I'd ask for confirmation names, but really - please don't. But at your word, to confirm, you are seeing a dealer executing transfers of complete firearms sold as pistols, with a brace on it? More than one? That's actually pretty huge if dealers are actually starting to do that again.. ...with "Magpul BTR Pistol Stabilizing Brace." Yeaa... that says "all NFA rules apply" on PSA website still when you put it in your cart. More to the question, they mail it to some other FFL. who is the one who has to do the actual transfer to you and the one actually at risk. To date, he has been instructed transfer that as a Title 1 is an NFA violation and to expect to be treated as such. Him, not PSA. A Federal Judge has said no, its fine. Are the FFL's displaying enough confidence to take a youtube video or Twitter post describing a Fed Judge decision, over their written ATF instructions, to resume transfers as is in complete configuration? In truth, they actually can right now; I'm curious if any actually are. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 1:47:13 AM EDT
[#6]
If you remember when all this started PSA was QUICK to stop selling guns and kits with braces.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 8:30:07 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATH223: If you remember when all this started PSA was QUICK to stop selling guns and kits with braces. So, they're the bad guy now? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 9:44:55 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Trumpet: So, they're the bad guy now? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Trumpet: Originally Posted By HEATH223: If you remember when all this started PSA was QUICK to stop selling guns and kits with braces. So, they're the bad guy now? They wanted to stay in business. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 10:33:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: GGGBeo50]
[#9]
Just came here to say, "told you so".
While its not official because the ruling hasnt been officially declared unconstitutional, I suspect in about a year it will be. I was protected the entire time by other injunctions so my pistol stayed right where it was, but I saw how it affected gun sales for FFLs nationwide and thats where it really hurt others. I suspect manufacturers will be slow to respond this year because they have already allotted their sourcing for production. So congrats to all the free tax stamp people, hopefully you dont get bullied by the ATF later. Dont forget, theres no such thing as a free lunch. That being said, remove SBRs from the registry. A rifle is a rifle, not a pistol. |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 10:54:14 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATH223: If you remember when all this started PSA was QUICK to stop selling guns and kits with braces. And? As I recall everyone was quick to remove braces from inventory and pictures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 11:55:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Oldgold]
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KitBuilder: It's the Daily Deal. First page here: https://palmettostatearmory.com/ar-15/ar15-guns/pistols.html ...with "Magpul BTR Pistol Stabilizing Brace." But yeah, maybe good luck getting your local FFL to transfer it as a Handgun? I'm sure some will. Mine would. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 12:14:44 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Oldgold: Mine would. Ya, I am confident that mine would as well. That said, you can always buy the assembled lower separately and avoid the issue altogether 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/14/2023 12:25:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: triburst1]
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GGGBeo50: Just came here to say, "told you so". While its not official because the ruling hasnt been officially declared unconstitutional, I suspect in about a year it will be. I was protected the entire time by other injunctions so my pistol stayed right where it was, but I saw how it affected gun sales for FFLs nationwide and thats where it really hurt others. I suspect manufacturers will be slow to respond this year because they have already allotted their sourcing for production. So congrats to all the free tax stamp people, hopefully you dont get bullied by the ATF later. Dont forget, theres no such thing as a free lunch. That being said, remove SBRs from the registry. A rifle is a rifle, not a pistol. I submitted an AR pistol for the exempt stamp. I already had other SBRs as well as suppressors so it was really no lose for me. The only reason I even had a pistol was for ease of travel. Worst case scenario, hopefully the ruling sticks and I whip out another stripped lower and brace out of my parts bin and make myself another pistol. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2023 10:13:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Five on 5/31. Still no movement. 6 for me, same day, same current status. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2023 11:04:22 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Vehemence: 6 for me, same day, same current status. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Vehemence: Originally Posted By Cincinnatus: Five on 5/31. Still no movement. 6 for me, same day, same current status. I’ve submitted, certified and had a form 4 on a new suppressor approved since then. |
|
|
|
TN, USA
|
Posted: 11/20/2023 10:18:55 PM EDT
[#16]
What would the outcome be if someone purchased one of the currently advertised pistols, got it in hand, them the courts decide that no…those pistols are indeed evil killing machines and the ATF was all knowing in their just and correct ruling.
What would that outcome look like |
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 11/20/2023 10:56:37 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dunndw: What would the outcome be if someone purchased one of the currently advertised pistols, got it in hand, them the courts decide that no…those pistols are indeed evil killing machines and the ATF was all knowing in their just and correct ruling. What would that outcome look like You would most likely have to take the brace off is you were so inclined. Braces are not illegal, never have been. Large format pistols are not illegal, never have been. Braced pistols were technically never illegal, but a "rule" made them sorta illegal SBR's. One remedy was to simply remove the brace. |
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 11/21/2023 1:49:50 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dunndw: What would the outcome be if someone purchased one of the currently advertised pistols, got it in hand, them the courts decide that no…those pistols are indeed evil killing machines and the ATF was all knowing in their just and correct ruling. What would that outcome look like Keep voting for members of Congress who keep cutting the DOJ/ATF etc. budget until they get the message. Takes money to infringe on Constitutional Rights. |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 11/21/2023 1:58:23 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HEATH223: If you remember when all this started PSA was QUICK to stop selling guns and kits with braces. Liability, long drawn-out expensive litigation and prison time seem to have that effect... |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 11/30/2023 4:59:51 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lazyengineer: Yeaa... that says "all NFA rules apply" on PSA website still when you put it in your cart. More to the question, they mail it to some other FFL. who is the one who has to do the actual transfer to you and the one actually at risk. To date, he has been instructed transfer that as a Title 1 is an NFA violation and to expect to be treated as such. Him, not PSA. A Federal Judge has said no, its fine. Are the FFL's displaying enough confidence to take a youtube video or Twitter post describing a Fed Judge decision, over their written ATF instructions, to resume transfers as is in complete configuration? In truth, they actually can right now; I'm curious if any actually are. If PSA sent an SBR out with no form 3 approval for tax exempt transfer it would likely be the same federal charge as a licensed dealer/manufacturer transferring to an individual, company or trust with no form 4 approval, an NFA violation with a potential up to 10 year fed sentence and up to $250k in fines. I guarantee they have some competent counsel at their disposal and they have received some degree of consultation focused on this matter. The idea is, right now, a federal judge has issued an injunction, that alone is their release to carry on selling braces, braces pistols, etc. If that injunction is overruled, etc. they snatch the parking brake again. As far as more than a few, if that, licensees speaking out publicly on this matter about them carrying on with braced pistol transfers and sales I would not hold my breath for it. With FFL revocations at all time highs expect FFLs to not be very vocal about much. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and ATF doesn't have the manpower to door-to-door every FFL for official records audit to see what they are doing on a regular basis. At this point, why would anyone ask for a bullseye on their forehead? However, that doesn't mean agents, local LE and govt investigation contractors won't be soliciting braced pistol purchases to get an idea of who they might want to visit now or even later if the injunction goes away. It's risky business right now but someone has to test the waters. It will definitely be interesting to watch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2023 5:36:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: lazyengineer]
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By evlblkwpnz: If PSA sent an SBR out with no form 3 approval for tax exempt transfer it would likely be the same federal charge as a licensed dealer/manufacturer transferring to an individual, company or trust with no form 4 approval, an NFA violation with a potential up to 10 year fed sentence and up to $250k in fines. I guarantee they have some competent counsel at their disposal and they have received some degree of consultation focused on this matter. The idea is, right now, a federal judge has issued an injunction, that alone is their release to carry on selling braces, braces pistols, etc. If that injunction is overruled, etc. they snatch the parking brake again. As far as more than a few, if that, licensees speaking out publicly on this matter about them carrying on with braced pistol transfers and sales I would not hold my breath for it. With FFL revocations at all time highs expect FFLs to not be very vocal about much. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and ATF doesn't have the manpower to door-to-door every FFL for official records audit to see what they are doing on a regular basis. At this point, why would anyone ask for a bullseye on their forehead? However, that doesn't mean agents, local LE and govt investigation contractors won't be soliciting braced pistol purchases to get an idea of who they might want to visit now or even later if the injunction goes away. It's risky business right now but someone has to test the waters. It will definitely be interesting to watch. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By evlblkwpnz: Originally Posted By lazyengineer: Yeaa... that says "all NFA rules apply" on PSA website still when you put it in your cart. More to the question, they mail it to some other FFL. who is the one who has to do the actual transfer to you and the one actually at risk. To date, he has been instructed transfer that as a Title 1 is an NFA violation and to expect to be treated as such. Him, not PSA. A Federal Judge has said no, its fine. Are the FFL's displaying enough confidence to take a youtube video or Twitter post describing a Fed Judge decision, over their written ATF instructions, to resume transfers as is in complete configuration? In truth, they actually can right now; I'm curious if any actually are. If PSA sent an SBR out with no form 3 approval for tax exempt transfer it would likely be the same federal charge as a licensed dealer/manufacturer transferring to an individual, company or trust with no form 4 approval, an NFA violation with a potential up to 10 year fed sentence and up to $250k in fines. I guarantee they have some competent counsel at their disposal and they have received some degree of consultation focused on this matter. The idea is, right now, a federal judge has issued an injunction, that alone is their release to carry on selling braces, braces pistols, etc. If that injunction is overruled, etc. they snatch the parking brake again. As far as more than a few, if that, licensees speaking out publicly on this matter about them carrying on with braced pistol transfers and sales I would not hold my breath for it. With FFL revocations at all time highs expect FFLs to not be very vocal about much. Squeaky wheel gets the grease and ATF doesn't have the manpower to door-to-door every FFL for official records audit to see what they are doing on a regular basis. At this point, why would anyone ask for a bullseye on their forehead? However, that doesn't mean agents, local LE and govt investigation contractors won't be soliciting braced pistol purchases to get an idea of who they might want to visit now or even later if the injunction goes away. It's risky business right now but someone has to test the waters. It will definitely be interesting to watch. I'll agree with that. Let's be honest, PSA is the best thing that has ever happened to the AR15 community, and are people that I personally and professionally hold in the highest of regard. They are also a for-profit business and are almostly certaintly the single largest revenue generator on the topic of arm-braced AR15's. The are more vested in this topic than any other entity short of SBTactical themselves. Nothing wrong with that - that's actually great and I tip my hat to them yet again; but it does mean that their motivations and actions may not be so representational of many others. For them to do the research and push it (safely and legally) enough to ship and transfer the units as described, is as potentially true as it is non-representational. And as you say, they are correct and unlikely to recieve legal harrassments from doing so. But as all things on this topic, the top harrassment (on everyone from the craziest of angles at times), is our own. I would be curious how many local FFL's are pleased to receieve such grey firearm configuration that published ATF regulations specifically state are NFA items (and a couple judges have said - well not this week). My guess is very few. If I were in charge of PSA, I would be pushing the shit out of these right now too. And I'd pack every shipment in unassembled form; so the recieving FFL will more likely accept it. And if I were the recieving FFL, I'd be transfering a lot of "OTHER" lowers; which is to say, incomplete two halves;. Or "Pistol Lowers", with the brace not attached at the time. And then provided as a separate item. At their own store-fronts in-state, I'm curious what configuration PSA is actually handing them over and transfering them as. They might be doing the good old "Pistol" and handing it over as-is; though personally I'd probably do "Pistol", and then handing over the brace separately. This mess is far from over, and units transfer after announcment date are going to be their own particular mess - though who knows! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2023 7:37:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: jasonm4]
[#22]
Not sure if it's been mentioned but an ATF agent told me today that as of last week, all submitted brace rule form 1's that are currently pending are put on hold for now.
That probably already seems obvious, but figured I'd mention it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/30/2023 8:43:16 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jasonm4: Not sure if it's been mentioned but an ATF agent told me today that as of last week, all submitted brace rule form 1's that are currently pending are put on hold for now. That probably already seems obvious, but figured I'd mention it. Next hit - since our (ATF) made up law got shot down, everyone who thought they got got a free tax stamp, must now re-submit paperwork with a $200 check attached. You have 30 seconds to comply. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 11/30/2023 9:26:11 PM EDT
[#24]
I see what you did there
But in actuality, they got what they wanted all along. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/1/2023 4:41:34 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By evlblkwpnz: Liability, long drawn-out expensive litigation and prison time seem to have that effect... Lawrence Demonico laughs at this... |
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 12/1/2023 6:59:07 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jasonm4: Not sure if it's been mentioned but an ATF agent told me today that as of last week, all submitted brace rule form 1's that are currently pending are put on hold for now. That probably already seems obvious, but figured I'd mention it. If so, that is interesting. Although I would think that it would not take this long to approve all of them. Whole thing is a gigantic shit show of their own making. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/1/2023 8:49:32 PM EDT
[#27]
I have to agree there.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2023 7:51:09 AM EDT
[#28]
Has anyone received anything in writing that attests to there being an official pause in the process?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2023 10:03:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus]
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Has anyone received anything in writing that attests to there being an official pause in the process? The court order is in writing, not sure what else anyone would need. Possibly carry your FPC membership card when you have your braced pistol with you? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2023 10:34:18 AM EDT
[#30]
No. The court order did not tell the ATF to stop processing the SBR applications.
|
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 12/2/2023 11:19:01 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Piratepast40: The court order is in writing, not sure what else anyone would need. Possibly carry your FPC membership card when you have your braced pistol with you? The injunction is nation-wide, there is no longer a requirement to be a member of any group to be covered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2023 11:28:31 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: No. The court order did not tell the ATF to stop processing the SBR applications. You're right, but they absolutely have stopped processing brace rule form 1's. I follow the NFA sub on Reddit and on the stickied approval thread, there hasn't been any new freeBR approvals in the last couple weeks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/2/2023 12:09:15 PM EDT
[#33]
Like I said, I’m VERY curious to see anything official from ATF regarding the pause.
|
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 12/5/2023 9:13:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: fire4effect69]
[#34]
**********
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 12/30/2023 1:36:55 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alpha0815: Lawrence Demonico laughs at this... I'd agree. The guy definitely has stones. I'd assume PSA has a lot more people with serious skin (<$,$$$,$$$) in the game to satisfy with their decisions. Sometimes shareholders/investors call the shots with minimizing liabilities at the forefront of their MO and they definitely have a lot to lose as diversified as they have become. It's not as fun as watching LD trigger the DOJ, for sure. Dude has reached legendary status 
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 1/1/2024 3:23:04 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Piratepast40: The court order is in writing, not sure what else anyone would need. Possibly carry your FPC membership card when you have your braced pistol with you? Nah...that comes too close to this 
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 2/11/2024 12:09:03 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: ... But in actuality, they got what they wanted all along. This is over my head  What did they get that they wanted all along? |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 2/11/2024 3:08:57 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Catalina: This is over my head What did they get that they wanted all along?Names and addresses. To add to the "directory"
|
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:24:22 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Names and addresses. To add to the "directory" The same names and addresses they already had from other nfa stuff? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:43:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Names and addresses. To add to the "directory" Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Originally Posted By Catalina: This is over my head What did they get that they wanted all along?Names and addresses. To add to the "directory" Lol, they have had my name and address for decades |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 11:15:46 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TN-MadDog: Lol, they have had my name and address for decades Your choice! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 11:50:14 AM EDT
[#42]
I am fairly certain they have the names and address of folks that purchased new firearms.
|
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 3:26:45 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By nod005: I am fairly certain they have the names and address of folks that purchased new firearms. Because you purchased something doesn't mean you currently possess something. When you raise your hand you remove all doubt
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 6:52:42 PM EDT
[#44]
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 9:23:30 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Because you purchased something doesn't mean you currently possess something. When you raise your hand you remove all doubt Registering a SBR does not mean you currently possess a SBR. Unlike MGs and silencers, they can be transferred in other (Title I) configurations, with no paperwork. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 10:29:09 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KitBuilder: @s4s4u Registering a SBR does not mean you currently possess a SBR. Unlike MGs and silencers, they can be transferred in other (Title I) configurations, with no paperwork. Which makes the whole charade even more ludicrous 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2024 10:26:55 AM EDT
[#47]
Well one thing is for certain is that most of us would like to know wth is the outcome of all of this bs.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 9:04:42 PM EDT
[#48]
Any updated news on this bull crap?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2024 10:06:16 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TN-MadDog: Lol, they have had my name and address for decades Yep. My first SBR on a form one was in 2005. |
|
|
|
NE, USA
|
Posted: 3/21/2024 9:53:28 AM EDT
[#50]
Do not hear much..But they are are being sold again..So they are OK now..And I think that decision is being appealed to the SCOTUS so we wait...I am certain Garland will lose there..I am doubtful the SCOTUS will even hear the case or the ATF decides to just drop it and let it go.. Only question is, what happens on the Amnesty registered ones..
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
