[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Pistol brace rule signed (VACATED 6/13/24) (Page 12 of 160)
|
Quoted: No. There are two different SBRs now. One that is free with brace and one that is $200 for a stock Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The only good to come of this is tax free SBR stamps, with that said, I'm keeping the pistols I've always intended on keeping as pistols, as they are. Now, a few guns that I was planning on sbr'ing over the next couple months, yeah, sure. But here goes under one month form 1 times  Wonder how long this ruling will take to run thru the courts You can’t. You only get it for free if you keep a brace. If you want a stock then you need to do the regular $200 stamp. @StrikeEagle15 Please show the class where it says in the final ruling that you have to keep the brace on the gun once it is registered as an SBR. You can't because it isn't in there. The fact is, there will be no regulatory difference between these new SBR's and any other SBR's. In fact, the BATFE saying braces are stocks lumps them all together and allows you to put any kind of stock you want once your SBR is properly registered and stamped. If you happen to have a lower laying around that you want SBR'd, as well as a brace, go ahead, toss them together with a short barreled upper, and do an eForm 1. Once it is approved, you have a legally registered SBR. You can now replace the brace with any other stock. You just won't be able to put the brace onto another lower until after that lower is registered as an SBR and, at that point, the brace is pointless, so you might as well toss it in the trash. This is your one chance to build what BATFE now considers an SBR without paying a tax and prior to receiving approval. No. There are two different SBRs now. One that is free with brace and one that is $200 for a stock No theres not. This is how so much misinformation gets spread...shìt like this. |
|
Quoted: Does this say a brace that can encompass the arm and has some type of attaching device ie: velcro strap that it is legal as is? Do you have to be a certified handicapped person to posess such a dangerous device? Quoted: Quoted: This rule does not affect "stabilizing braces" that are objectively designed and intended as a "stabilizing brace" for use by individuals with disabilities, and not for shouldering the weapon as a rifle. Such stabilizing braces are designed to conform to the arm and not as a buttstock. However, if the firearm with the "stabilizing brace" is a short-barreled rifle, it needs to be registered within 120-days from the date of publication in the Federal Register. Get some doctor to say you have muscle weakness or something Does this say a brace that can encompass the arm and has some type of attaching device ie: velcro strap that it is legal as is? Do you have to be a certified handicapped person to posess such a dangerous device? No. The last bit clearly states that if the braced weapon is an SBR under their definition, it must be registered, handicapped or not. They are saying if you have a brace on a non-SBR, the rule doesn't affect you. |
|
Quoted: In the 90's a bunch of people registered USAS-12's. Others didn't and now most of been sold as spare parts. If ATF attempts to convict people based upon their amnesty registrations, they will lose quickly in court. ATF will lose slowly in court anyways. They've clearly overstepped current supreme court rulings. Quoted: Quoted: It is a mouse trap: FREE FOOD IN HERE, GO HERE FOR THE ALL YOU CAN EAT BUFFET anddddd ..SNAP. Dead. In the 90's a bunch of people registered USAS-12's. Others didn't and now most of been sold as spare parts. If ATF attempts to convict people based upon their amnesty registrations, they will lose quickly in court. ATF will lose slowly in court anyways. They've clearly overstepped current supreme court rulings. How has it generally ended globally and historically? |
|
Quoted: No. The last bit clearly states that if the braced weapon is an SBR under their definition, it must be registered, handicapped or not. They are saying if you have a brace on a non-SBR, the rule doesn't affect you. Attached File |
|
Quoted: How has it generally ended globally and historically? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It is a mouse trap: FREE FOOD IN HERE, GO HERE FOR THE ALL YOU CAN EAT BUFFET anddddd ..SNAP. Dead. In the 90's a bunch of people registered USAS-12's. Others didn't and now most of been sold as spare parts. If ATF attempts to convict people based upon their amnesty registrations, they will lose quickly in court. ATF will lose slowly in court anyways. They've clearly overstepped current supreme court rulings. How has it generally ended globally and historically? War. |
|
Quoted: Back in the real world there are people who believe the NFA is unconstitutional, but still have registered firearms. Am I cheering this rule on? No. Will I make use of it to expand my NFA collections? Yes. Will I support legal efforts to get this rule overturned? Absolutely. +1 |
|
Quoted: War. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It is a mouse trap: FREE FOOD IN HERE, GO HERE FOR THE ALL YOU CAN EAT BUFFET anddddd ..SNAP. Dead. In the 90's a bunch of people registered USAS-12's. Others didn't and now most of been sold as spare parts. If ATF attempts to convict people based upon their amnesty registrations, they will lose quickly in court. ATF will lose slowly in court anyways. They've clearly overstepped current supreme court rulings. How has it generally ended globally and historically? War. Unfortunately, no. Disarmament. |
|
Quoted: So millions of new applications. The AFT should have those sorted out by rapture. Quoted: Quoted: Wow. It does have the "free stamp" https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/480443/Screenshot_20230113_140703_Samsung_Notes-2670565.JPG So millions of new applications. The AFT should have those sorted out by rapture. That's why I piled in anything I even remotely wanted in the last year |
|
Quoted: So is this a ban on PISTOLS or pistol BRACES? With some manufacturers coming out with guns I want in the near future, a pistol version AK was certainly an option I would think. Will they now need to sell it with a side-folding trunnion and a blank rear or even a picatinny rear section or will all guns now be rifles, not pistols. Pistols are still pistols. If there is nothing at all to shoulder you're gtg. If you had a 'cheek rest' or 'counterweight' ???????? |
|
Quoted: Fuck em. Take the brace off and put on a bumpstock instead Attached File |
|
Quoted: No Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They did not adopt the Worksheet 4999. Instead, anything that provides a surface that can be shouldered is a stock. Form 1 is free to make your braced gun a SBR. I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I see. Is a bare pistol buffer tube now a stock? No You sure? Attached File |
|
Quoted: This! Is having a buffer tube attached to a lower considered a stock now? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They did not adopt the Worksheet 4999. Instead, anything that provides a surface that can be shouldered is a stock. Form 1 is free to make your braced gun a SBR. I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I see. Is a bare pistol buffer tube now a stock? Is having a buffer tube attached to a lower considered a stock now? Nothing in the FINAL ruling starting on Pg 268 mention a "Pistol Buffer." However, there is discussion where they say they, "may consider the requirement for cycling" Discussion page 162-163 One objective design feature ATF may consider is whether the attachment is required for the cycle of operations of the weapon, which could indicate the firearm is not designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder. For example, an AR-type pistol with a standard 6- to 6-1/2-inch buffer tube may not be designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder even if the buffer tube provides surface area that allows the firearm to be shoulder fired. On an AR-type pistol, the buffer tube encases a spring that drives the bolt forward when the bolt is driven into the buffer tube by the gas from the initial shot. The picture below displays the internal function of an AR-15 type rifle. The AR-type pistol is a variant of the rifle with the stock removed and has the same receiver and buffer tube function of the rifle version. In contrast, if the buffer tube, receiver extension, or other component is not required for the cycle of operations of the weapon, ATF may conclude it serves no purpose but to extend the rear surface area of the weapon toward the shooter to provide surface area for shouldering and to increase the overall length of pull, which in turn provides a shooter a better aim-point on the firearm and horizontal stabilization to shoulder-fire the firearm. Page 249-250 In the cost analysis With respect to the cost of replacing the buffer tube with a pistol tube, the rule does not require such a replacement. The Department also finds it unlikely that these individuals will purchase a pistol tube; therefore, the cost for a pistol tube was not included in the final analysis. They never state that a pistol tube is legal or a standard buffer tube is OK as a "pistol". The say if you add a folding stock adaptor that can increase the length of pull, thus providing the ability to fire from the shoulder. The don't say how much area is "allowed" before it is able to be "shouldered". The Page 290 rifle definition incorporates all of the form 4999 items that let them define a rifle as they want. Rifle. * * * (1) For purposes of this definition, the term “designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” shall include a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a “stabilizing brace”) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided other factors, as described in paragraph (2), indicate that the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. (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. |
|
Quoted:Unfortunately, no. Disarmament. In the mean time, if you want to practice and be proficient with your firearms, I suggest having something on the registry (or only planning on using firearms that don't need to be on the registry). Machineguns in particular are difficult to practice with inconspicuously. One thing I really like about bumpstocks is that it made rapid fire much more common. I think everyone here should have several unregistered, unserialized firearms. Unfortunately most won't put in the effort to obtain them. I'm of the opinion this rule will be trashed by the courts anyways. I'm less rosy about what will happen to SBR's, but hopefully this rule will lead to SBR's being declared in common use and we'll see a partial dissolution of the NFA. I wish we would see a complete dissolution of the NFA, but I think it's rather unlikely we'll see the courts say machineguns don't need registration. |
|
Could a suppressor be considered accessory? |
|
Quoted: Nothing in the FINAL ruling starting on Pg 268 mention a "Pistol Buffer." However, there is discussion where they say they, "may consider the requirement for cycling" Discussion page 162-163 One objective design feature ATF may consider is whether the attachment is required for the cycle of operations of the weapon, which could indicate the firearm is not designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder. For example, an AR-type pistol with a standard 6- to 6-1/2-inch buffer tube may not be designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder even if the buffer tube provides surface area that allows the firearm to be shoulder fired. On an AR-type pistol, the buffer tube encases a spring that drives the bolt forward when the bolt is driven into the buffer tube by the gas from the initial shot. The picture below displays the internal function of an AR-15 type rifle. The AR-type pistol is a variant of the rifle with the stock removed and has the same receiver and buffer tube function of the rifle version. In contrast, if the buffer tube, receiver extension, or other component is not required for the cycle of operations of the weapon, ATF may conclude it serves no purpose but to extend the rear surface area of the weapon toward the shooter to provide surface area for shouldering and to increase the overall length of pull, which in turn provides a shooter a better aim-point on the firearm and horizontal stabilization to shoulder-fire the firearm. Page 249-250 In the cost analysis With respect to the cost of replacing the buffer tube with a pistol tube, the rule does not require such a replacement. The Department also finds it u They never state that a pistol tube is legal or a standard buffer tube is OK as a "pistol". The say if you add a folding stock adaptor that can increase the length of pull, thus providing the ability to fire from the shoulder. The don't say how much area is "allowed" before it is The Page 290 rifle definition incorporates all of the form 4999 items that let them define a rifle as they want. Intentionally overcomplicated and verbose to hide the fact that anything can be illegal if they say so. |
|
A braced pistol that is not an sbr can still exist. If the brace is functional as a brace and short enough not to be practically shoulderable. And the gun doesn't have short eye relief sights/scope This sounds like a MORE strict version of the points system. Now you effectively need zeroes to pass. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They did not adopt the Worksheet 4999. Instead, anything that provides a surface that can be shouldered is a stock. Form 1 is free to make your braced gun a SBR. I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I see. Is a bare pistol buffer tube now a stock? No You sure? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/80518/Screenshot_20230113-154602_Acrobat_for_S-2670925.JPG Someone already posted the complete answer. They mean an attachment that’s not part of the operating parts of the firearm. Because the buffer tube contains the action spring and buffer it’s not an “attachment” |
|
Quoted: How has it generally ended globally and historically? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It is a mouse trap: FREE FOOD IN HERE, GO HERE FOR THE ALL YOU CAN EAT BUFFET anddddd ..SNAP. Dead. In the 90's a bunch of people registered USAS-12's. Others didn't and now most of been sold as spare parts. If ATF attempts to convict people based upon their amnesty registrations, they will lose quickly in court. ATF will lose slowly in court anyways. They've clearly overstepped current supreme court rulings. How has it generally ended globally and historically? Everyone who registered their firearms (after amnesties/reclassifications/etc) now has a transferable NFA weapon, everyone who didn't now has something they have to hide in their crawlspace, or cut into chunks and sell as a parts kit. Globally? The NFA has been around since about the time Stalin and Hitler came into power, and well before Pol Pot and Mao ......and they haven't been "rounded up" , nor have we been loaded onto boxcars yet Just fucking stop |
|
Quoted: Have a look at this bullshit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/80518/Screenshot_20230113-152818_Acrobat_for_S-2670901.JPG Do I need to write a note promising that I do not intend to put them back together until the SC pushes the fatf shit in? Does it have to be notarized? |
|
Quoted: Everyone who registered their firearms then now has a transferable NFA weapon, everyone who didn't now has something they have to hide in their crawlspace, or cut into chunks and sell as a parts kit. Globally? The NFA has been around since about the time Stalin and Hitler came into power, and well before Pol Pot and Mao ......and they haven't been "rounded up" , nor have we been loaded onto boxcars yet Just fucking stop Give it a few more years under biden |
|
Quoted: Fuck em. Take the brace off and put on a bumpstock instead Attached File |
|
Quoted: Someone already posted the complete answer. They mean an attachment that’s not part of the operating parts of the firearm. Because the buffer tube contains the action spring and buffer it’s not an “attachment” Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They did not adopt the Worksheet 4999. Instead, anything that provides a surface that can be shouldered is a stock. Form 1 is free to make your braced gun a SBR. I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I see. Is a bare pistol buffer tube now a stock? No You sure? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/80518/Screenshot_20230113-154602_Acrobat_for_S-2670925.JPG Someone already posted the complete answer. They mean an attachment that’s not part of the operating parts of the firearm. Because the buffer tube contains the action spring and buffer it’s not an “attachment” What if someone started selling a buffer tube in the shape of a buttstock ? No attachment. Its a part that contains the buffer. |
|
This is going to be one of the most epic ATF shit shows ever. The pistol brace has been around since 2012 when Alex Bosco sent the brace to the ATF for approval and it was granted. 10 years. It would be interesting to know how many braces have been manufactured, sold in kits and installed on factory produced firearms. |
|
Quoted: ATF specifically says to keep the email receipt from your submission and you are good to go until either approved or denied. You would figure that the number of people getting this worked up would at least read the document if it meant that much to them.  FTATF 
|
|
Quoted: This is going to be one of the most epic ATF shit shows ever. The pistol brace has been around since 2012 when Alex Bosco sent the brace to the ATF for approval and it was granted. 10 years. It would be interesting to know how many braces have been manufactured, sold in kits and installed on factory produced firearms. |
|
Quoted: Everyone who registered their firearms (after amnesties/reclassifications/etc) now has a transferable NFA weapon, everyone who didn't now has something they have to hide in their crawlspace, or cut into chunks and sell as a parts kit. Globally? The NFA has been around since about the time Stalin and Hitler came into power, and well before Pol Pot and Mao ......and they haven't been "rounded up" , nor have we been loaded onto boxcars yet Just fucking stop Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It is a mouse trap: FREE FOOD IN HERE, GO HERE FOR THE ALL YOU CAN EAT BUFFET anddddd ..SNAP. Dead. In the 90's a bunch of people registered USAS-12's. Others didn't and now most of been sold as spare parts. If ATF attempts to convict people based upon their amnesty registrations, they will lose quickly in court. ATF will lose slowly in court anyways. They've clearly overstepped current supreme court rulings. How has it generally ended globally and historically? Everyone who registered their firearms (after amnesties/reclassifications/etc) now has a transferable NFA weapon, everyone who didn't now has something they have to hide in their crawlspace, or cut into chunks and sell as a parts kit. Globally? The NFA has been around since about the time Stalin and Hitler came into power, and well before Pol Pot and Mao ......and they haven't been "rounded up" , nor have we been loaded onto boxcars yet Just fucking stop Keep telling yourself that |
|
Quoted: If this gets overturned, you might not need a brace anymore. Quoted: Quoted: I've held off SBRing a lower because I knew this was coming. If it gets overturned I'll just get more pistol braces lowers. |
|
Quoted: Back in the real world there are people who believe the NFA is unconstitutional, but still have registered firearms. Am I cheering this rule on? No. Will I make use of it to expand my NFA collections? Yes. Will I support legal efforts to get this rule overturned? Absolutely. Thank you for typing out my thoughts. |
|
Quoted: What if someone started selling a buffer tube in the shape of a buttstock ? No attachment. Its a part that contains the buffer. Attached File |
|
Quoted: A braced pistol that is not an sbr can still exist. If the brace is functional as a brace and short enough not to be practically shoulderable. And the gun doesn't have short eye relief sights/scope This sounds like a MORE strict version of the points system. Now you effectively need zeroes to pass. If an Entry stock is usable, what prevents the ATF from claiming anything stuck to a carbine tube can be shouldered? Attached File Kharn |
|
Quoted: there are advantages to the pistol over the sbr Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I've held off SBRing a lower because I knew this was coming. If it gets overturned I'll just get more pistol braces lowers. Most notable for me was the whole "don't need to tell the ATF you're going out of state a year in advance" ETA: Oh, and you can conceal a pistol in VA, but not a SBR |