AR Sponsor
Posted: 1/13/2023 6:55:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus][Edited]
 ATF Bans Braced Pistols & Turns Millions Of Americans Into Felons |
Distinguished Rifleman, President’s Hundred
Joined:
Oct 2010
Posts:
8333
EE: 100% (1)
USA
|
Originally Posted By TheLASwamp: Does this include pistols like the EP9? I haven't checked yet. I thought the EPA decision specifically stated that unelected agencies like the ATF can't make law. What am I missing here? They just fake pretend that they are simply enforcing the existing law. And it was you all along that is the criminal. 
|
|
SAF Response: SAF RIPS ATF 'FINAL RULE' ON ARM BRACES, LAWSUIT WILL MOVE FORWARD The Second Amendment Foundation today accused the Biden administration of "once again trying to trample the rights of gun owners" by allowing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to adopt a "final rule" on arm braces for modern semiautomatic pistols. While the definition of a rifle in federal law should be clear, noted attorney Chad Flores, who is representing SAF in a federal lawsuit filed two years ago that was stayed by the court in anticipation of this new rule, it is clear the Biden administration's new definition of a rifle ignores tradition. SAF sued ATF and the U.S. Attorney General in 2021 in a case known as SAF et. al. v. BATFE, et. al. SAF is joined in that case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. According to Flores' analysis of the 291-page Final Rule, the definition of a "rifle" now turns on a bewildering six-factor test. This new definition can be controlled not by the firearm's objective characteristics, but instead by what ATF agents in D.C. think of a manufacturer's marketing materials or the firearm's "likely use." The new rule itself is forced to admit its dramatic result: Under this new definitional regime, "a majority of the existing firearms equipped with a 'stabilizing brace' are likely to be classified as 'rifles.'" "The Biden administration's new rifle definition overrides the true wish of Congress, to upend the reasonable expectations of stabilizing brace users and makers nationwide," Flores said. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb noted the foundation's 2021 lawsuit raised critical points about what has now been adopted by ATF. "When we started this process," Gottlieb said, "we anticipated where the agency's efforts would lead. With our co-plaintiffs, we will continue to challenge this new arm brace rule." |
Always be flexible, but never go limp
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: They can pound sand...... This is just a backdoor registration scheme. call it what you want.........in 1968 the Feds did a tax free amnesty on machine guns..........no questions asked.............they bring a pretty penny today.............. |
|
Originally Posted By catcatcher1: call it what you want.........in 1968 the Feds did a tax free amnesty on machine guns..........no questions asked.............they bring a pretty penny today.............. And they KNOW WHERE EVERY ONE OF THEM IS You don't get it yet???? |
|
Originally Posted By catcatcher1: who cares...........its still will be legally mine That’s true, but as far as value, that’s a much bigger gamble than full auto. Short barrel rifles would be considered by some as a novelty. No where near as useful or desirable as full auto machine guns. And the fact that they would have to completely close off the sale and registration of sbr’s. that’s highly unlikely given the fact that it’s basically just a neutered rifle in the 5.56 round. |
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: And they KNOW WHERE EVERY ONE OF THEM IS You don't get it yet???? Attached File |
I'll have to have this ready to play in my stereo, at all times! Keep A-Knockin' |
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: They can pound sand...... This is just a backdoor registration scheme. Originally Posted By s4s4u: Originally Posted By catcatcher1: There will be a tax free amnesty period............120 days........... They can pound sand...... This is just a backdoor registration scheme. Good news for all you guys submitting form 1s, the wait won’t be nearly as long and backlogged as you think. Most guys won’t even bother. |
|
Originally Posted By hellishhorses: Good news for all you guys submitting form 1s, the wait won’t be nearly as long and backlogged as you think. Most guys won’t even bother. There are a whole bunch of folks that are already on the dreaded List so I imagine since it is 0 cost other than finger prints (get an EFT file and be done with it) that quite a few of 'em will be registering one or more. I know the two NFA owners I've talked to today have already said they are. |
|
Originally Posted By cms81586: I don't have any braces, but I'm sure as shit gonna SBR everything I've been waiting to SBR if the amnesty period is a thing. I suggest reading the following info https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download And the full 291 page rule change https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/factoringcriteriaforfirearmswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download |
DAV lifetime member
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
Sadly, and it's something that was said for years: ATF was simply wrong in the way back when they approved pistol braces. A pistol with a brace was always an SBR or AOW by the definitions in the NFA. Especially a pistol which is made from a rifle design. We didn't really object because it worked in our favor for a change, but... Things working in our favor never stand for long, and here we are today. |
Vintage Ain't Retro.
|
Originally Posted By chumpmiester: The amnesty is for pistols with braces attached that you possess before the rule is published. I suggest reading the following info https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download And the full 291 page rule change https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/factoringcriteriaforfirearmswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download The only part I'm seeing where previous ownership proof is needed is for a Trust in that FAQ section: 12. CAN I REGISTER MY FIREARM WITH A “STABILIZING BRACE” TO MY TRUST? • Yes, however, the firearm would have needed to be owned by the trust prior to the date the final rule is published in the Federal Register. Evidence that the firearms was in trust should be provided with the registration document. Is there anywhere else in the full document that says otherwise for an individual? Or is there something else I'm overlooking? |
|
Originally Posted By TheRat: The only part I'm seeing where previous ownership proof is needed is for a Trust in that FAQ section: 12. CAN I REGISTER MY FIREARM WITH A "STABILIZING BRACE" TO MY TRUST? Yes, however, the firearm would have needed to be owned by the trust prior to the date the final rule is published in the Federal Register. Evidence that the firearms was in trust should be provided with the registration document. Is there anywhere else in the full document that says otherwise for an individual? Or is there something else I'm overlooking? |
DAV lifetime member
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
Originally Posted By chumpmiester: The amnesty is for pistols with braces attached that you possess before the rule is published. I suggest reading the following info https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download And the full 291 page rule change https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/factoringcriteriaforfirearmswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download What they don’t know won’t hurt them. |
|
Originally Posted By chumpmiester: The amnesty is for pistols with braces attached that you possess before the rule is published. I suggest reading the following info https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download And the full 291 page rule change https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/factoringcriteriaforfirearmswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download This brings up a good point. Their rule makes it sound like even a pistol buffer tube will be considered an SBR going forward, but amnesty is only for braces? Are we sure that’s how it’s gonna work? |
|
Originally Posted By BhamAR: This brings up a good point. Their rule makes it sound like even a pistol buffer tube will be considered an SBR going forward, but amnesty is only for braces? Are we sure that’s how it’s gonna work? Actually there are braces that will pass the worksheet. But, it is their little disclaimer that they can rule a qualifying gun an SBR if the feel like it that muddies the water. That is also what is going to get it tossed when the first judge with a right mind views the cases coming before them. |
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: Actually there are braces that will pass the worksheet. But, it is their little disclaimer that they can rule a qualifying gun an SBR if the feel like it that muddies the water. That is also what is going to get it tossed when the first judge with a right mind views the cases coming before them. Ummm, somebody wanna tell him? |
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: Actually there are braces that will pass the worksheet. But, it is their little disclaimer that they can rule a qualifying gun an SBR if the feel like it that muddies the water. That is also what is going to get it tossed when the first judge with a right mind views the cases coming before them. I haven't read all 290 something pages, but someone posted that there is no worksheet. So this applies to ALL braces, period. And someone also posted that this new ruling declared AR pistols with bare buffer tubes as NFA/SBR because they're 'shoulderable'. OK, they can argue all they want that they 'misclassified' braces, but bare tube pistols have been legal as long as they've existed. And if they admit they made a mistake, then they admit they're not qualified to regulate anything. edit: I was wrong on bare buffer tubes, if required for function as on an AR pistol they're allowed but cannot be modified 'for shouldering'. Someonequoted that part of the new rulingin the General discussion thread. So assuming that if you have an SB brace on an empty buffer tube mounted to something like a Scorpion Evo you not only have to remove the brace, but the empty buffer tube as well. |
|
A bare short/pistol buffer tube on an AR pistol is still legal with the new rule change. In fact removing the brace IS one option on how to make your braced pistol compliant. Attached File https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download |
DAV lifetime member
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: Actually there are braces that will pass the worksheet. But, it is their little disclaimer that they can rule a qualifying gun an SBR if the feel like it that muddies the water. That is also what is going to get it tossed when the first judge with a right mind views the cases coming before them. Originally Posted By s4s4u: Originally Posted By BhamAR: This brings up a good point. Their rule makes it sound like even a pistol buffer tube will be considered an SBR going forward, but amnesty is only for braces? Are we sure that’s how it’s gonna work? Actually there are braces that will pass the worksheet. But, it is their little disclaimer that they can rule a qualifying gun an SBR if the feel like it that muddies the water. That is also what is going to get it tossed when the first judge with a right mind views the cases coming before them. They kicked the “worksheet” (even though they referenced it a few times) and basically said “99.9% of braces are stocks.” With the worksheet there were workarounds and an objective, relatively clear set of criteria that would leave the door open for clever manufacturers to design something that met all criteria but still functionally did the same thing as existing braces. The new criteria is “does it have a flat surface on the rear that can be rested against your shoulder?” By what’s written, even an AR pistol without any brace installed (just a bare pistol tube) is now viewed as an SBR. |
|
Originally Posted By chumpmiester: A bare short/pistol buffer tube on an AR pistol is still legal with the new rule change. In fact removing the brace IS one option on how to make your braced pistol compliant. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/101824/Screen_Shot_2023-01-14_at_8_47_00_AM_png-2671619.JPG https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download They’re saying that, but what they wrote in the rest of the document could very easily be applied to a bare pistol receiver extension. If there’s a window for abuse to occur, someone with the authority to do so will use it to try and make an example out of someone. |
|
Originally Posted By WUPHF: They're saying that, but what they wrote in the rest of the document could very easily be applied to a bare pistol receiver extension. If there's a window for abuse to occur, someone with the authority to do so will use it to try and make an example out of someone. There has been a window for abuse since the ATF first proposed a rule change on braces back in 2020. Not to mention all of the flip flopping they did on determination letters. I am in no way telling people what or what not to do with my posts here. I am only trying to help clarify things as best we can. |
DAV lifetime member
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
NRA Patriot Life Benefactor
|
Originally Posted By WUPHF: They kicked the “worksheet” (even though they referenced it a few times) and basically said “99.9% of braces are stocks.” With the worksheet there were workarounds and an objective, relatively clear set of criteria that would leave the door open for clever manufacturers to design something that met all criteria but still functionally did the same thing as existing braces. The new criteria is “does it have a flat surface on the rear that can be rested against your shoulder?” By what’s written, even an AR pistol without any brace installed (just a bare pistol tube) is now viewed as an SBR. Well ain't that a bitch?!? I guess I will wait and watch for the lawsuits and subsequent spank down. |
|
Originally Posted By j3_: This one maybe for after the knock.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l12iPj-TQrMAlmost certainly since I'd rather die free than become enslaved to the JBT's. Sad thing is so many on this site would see a news clip about some guy getting killed by the ATF & who knows whatever story they tell the press & call him all kinds of things. It's OK to be a coward, maybe just stop belittling those who are willing to fight for all our rights. |
|
Originally Posted By s4s4u: They can pound sand...... This is just a backdoor registration scheme. They stated in the ruling they consider guns sold with braces as illegally transferred. There is no guarantee they will approve any eForn 1 submissions. Last years presumptive guilt/presumptive use of illegal parts denial of Form 1 suppressors indicates their mindset and capability. They have not been regulating in good faith. |
Koalas are fucking horrible animals.
AR Sponsor