User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:47:16 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Coffin-Nail: According to this even the old style AR pistols with only a buffer tube is now illegal. (4) 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; So a short barreled firearm with just a picatinny section in the rear is ok? Like Foxtrot Mike and Jakl? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:48:22 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ewald: I have a 120 days to make my braced pistol legal, but I can't make it legal since my state made it illegal to sell parts earlier this week. It is almost like someone planned it that way. Good news, the second felony on a gun cancels out the first....so you should be good to go. 
|
|
|
|
ZWE
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:48:54 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Nutro: So a short barreled firearm with just a picatinny section in the rear is ok? Like Foxtrot Mike and Jakl?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:49:29 PM EDT
[#4]
The litigation around this turd sandwich of a "rule" is going to YUGE.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:49:30 PM EDT
[#5]
Off to PSA to buy 10.5 and 11.5 uppers.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:49:52 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By odiedodi: They literally have no way to prove that. This is about to turn into a trash fire. With the pictures you send when submitting? |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:14 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Everrest: If you submit within 120 days after publication you are OK. pg 13 Thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:23 PM EDT
[#8]
Anything with a buffer tube is an SBR.
But also some braces are legal. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:30 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Coffin-Nail: According to this even the old style AR pistols with only a buffer tube is now illegal. (4) 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; So ALL pistol-style AR15's are now illegal? They ALL have buffer extension tubes. Every single one of them. (I'm talking REAL AR15's, not Sig MCX or other non-buffer tube designs) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:32 PM EDT
[#10]
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Coffin-Nail: According to this even the old style AR pistols with only a buffer tube is now illegal. (4) 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; Declaring all AR etc pistols illegal because of the buffer tube would be total BS on their part. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:53 PM EDT
[#12]
I guess if someone already has registered SBR's on file, then they might as well register their pistols?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:57 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mooreshawnm: Off to PSA to buy 10.5 and 11.5 uppers. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:50:59 PM EDT
[#14]
So......
If I have a few 80% lowers sitting around I can make them all SBRs for free? |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:51:03 PM EDT
[#15]
Free SBRs let's look at the bright side. And in 2 years this will get tossed by the USC so we can have some free SBRs and the brace rule is so ridiculous it will get shot down.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:51:43 PM EDT
[#16]
Just logged into eforms, nothing different in the Form 1 process
But it looks like I see more categories on the left side, not sure if those were there before or not.  Attached FileIs this new or am I just forgetting how its always been? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:52:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: mousehunter]
[#17]
Pistol buffer tubes have been around a lot more than 10 years. Mare's Lags have been legal for more than a century. Yet the new rule appears to allow the ATF to make anything illegal it wants to. Hell, a collapsible stock is potentially illegal because it can be disassembled and made into an illegal brace.
|
|
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:52:07 PM EDT
[#18]
So if I put back on a pistol buffer tube is that counted as something that can be shouldered?
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:52:24 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mr_camera_man: So, can lawsuits start once it's published in the federal register? Or not until after the 120 days? One can only challenge a final rule IF, and ONLY if, they are a commenter to the proposed rule which gives them standing to sue. Assuming one submitted comments, then they would be able to bring suit. And to answer your question, that time would be the first day after the rule is finalized. Just because it publishes as a final rule does not create finalization, typically there is a 30 day period after final rule publishing to which the rule becomes final. Then one could make a challenge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:52:33 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bjohnson425: So what about a pistol brace on a pistol https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/351853/2DC52062-F336-4D9D-AEF5-A7F7D8352ED3_jpe-2670601.JPGThe document includes a link to various pictures of guns now considered to be SBR's. They specifically include Glocks with Roni, MCK, and Flux braces, as well as others. |
|
|
|
ZWE
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:52:33 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MallNinja531: The litigation around this turd sandwich of a "rule" is going to YUGE. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:52:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: CTM1]
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AR_Dale: Just owning a brace is illegal without it on a stamped SBR. If these fuckers are calling a brace a stock then it is a stock and people should be able to put it on any rifle they want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:53:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Everrest]
[#23]
Sounds like the braces you want to convert have to be already assembled.
Enforcement starts NOW.(may wait 60 days) pg 14 Notwithstanding the 120-day compliance period, discussed above, the rule is immediately effective in that the Department may seek to enforce the NFA’s requirements with respect to any new making or new transfer of a weapon with an attached “stabilizing brace”that constitutes a short-barreled rifle under the NFA. The Department believes that delaying enforcement of the relevant NFA provisions is not necessary to allow an equitable opportunity for compliance because all persons, through publication of this rule, have received notice that the NFA may in fact apply to their conduct. Further delaying enforcement also would be in consistent with public safety. Therefore, ATF may enforce the NFA against any person or entity that—any time after the publication date of this rule—[b]newly makes or transfers a weapon with an attached “stabilizing brace” that constitutes a short-barreled rifle under the NFA. For purposes of the Congressional Review Act, however, the Department will wait to actually initiate such enforcement actions for at least 60 days from publication of the rule in the Federal Register. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:53:19 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mr_camera_man: Sounds like a road trip is in order to a fun shop right on the border. The bigger challenge IIRC is that IL won't let you have an SBR without a C&R FFL. If you want one of those within 120 days, you should send off your application within the next hour. Correct |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:53:39 PM EDT
[#25]
Anyone defending this bs needs to
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:53:50 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Redneck_in_Texas: Article I, Section 9, Clause 3: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. Was legal when I bought it. They can fuck off back to Washington DC The Founders would really have a stroke over “Administrative action with the force of law”. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:54:28 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CTM1: If this fuckers are calling a brace a stock then it is a stock and people should be able to put it on any rifle they want. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CTM1: Originally Posted By AR_Dale: Just owning a brace is illegal without it on a stamped SBR. If this fuckers are calling a brace a stock then it is a stock and people should be able to put it on any rifle they want. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:54:38 PM EDT
[#28]
Lol ok. Congrats on that bundle of papers. I couldn't give any less of a shit about it. Multiple violations of the constitution in there. Null and void.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:54:40 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cdholmes: "For purposes of NFA registration, affected firearms that include the markings required by the GCA can be registered with the original marking if the firearm has already been marked in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102" I think this means no additional engraving required? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cdholmes: Originally Posted By HungLo: And if one registers for the "Free Stamp™", I'm assuming the firearm has to be engraved with the required NFA info. "For purposes of NFA registration, affected firearms that include the markings required by the GCA can be registered with the original marking if the firearm has already been marked in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 and 479.102" I think this means no additional engraving required? They are really making this up as they go. How is that any different than any other form 1 AR. If they are declaring that the owner “rediesigned / manufactured “ when they installed the brace. Lol what a cluster fuck. Any whoms, will not comply unless I can get a free SBR out of the deal. Already on the registry anyways. If that turns out to be the case I rotate my brace on all of my lowers. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:55:14 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN: With the pictures you send when submitting? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN: Originally Posted By odiedodi: They literally have no way to prove that. This is about to turn into a trash fire. With the pictures you send when submitting? What if there was a bunch of guys overseas with AR pistols stored various places back home- who cannot provide pictures or a notorized copy of their trust while overseas...and who won't be back til well after the rule is in affect? Hmm. I know more than several folks in this situation. Could be fun to play out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:55:32 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ENGCPT: So...... If I have a few 80% lowers sitting around I can make them all SBRs for free? Better to use serialized firearms and save the 80s for something you won't tell the government about. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:55:46 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Hking: Just logged into eforms, nothing different in the Form 1 process But it looks like I see more categories on the left side, not sure if those were there before or not. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/363844/eformsq_png-2670603.JPG Is this new or am I just forgetting how its always been? I logged into mine and see the same thing |
|
|
|
WV, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:55:52 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HungLo: What a fuck story.  So if registering under the "Free Stamp™" deal, does that mean the "Free Stamp™" only applies to the "brace", OR can you hang a regular stock on it since it's became a SBR? And if one registers for the "Free Stamp™", I'm assuming the firearm has to be engraved with the required NFA info. Maybe the answers are in the .pdf? The answers are in the PDF and FAQ |
|
|
NE, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:55:54 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Sixgunner45: Absolutely nothing ... to me. I'll continue to use my legally purchased braces, and factory braced pistols. The feds can FOAD for all I care. sooooo, you gonna convert them to full auto also same violation so why are you not doing that also? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:56:08 PM EDT
[#35]
Ha, really sucks for me and quite a few others that own S&W 15-22 “pistols”.
The buffer tube is a standard that is a molded piece of the receiver. Hmmm, either ignore the ruling or dremmel time. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:56:30 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ENGCPT: So...... If I have a few 80% lowers sitting around I can make them all SBRs for free? The way I read it they already have to be “made” with a “stabilizing brace” at time of the rule being published. |
|
|
|
ZWE
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:56:51 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN: With the pictures you send when submitting? >Attach to one gun >take photo >attach to the next gun you want a free stamp for >take photo Rinse and repeat. The question is how goofy they'll allow people to get. If you duct tape a brace to a glock, does that count? It wouldn't be too hard to jury rig up a more sturdy dohicky than tape to mount them to guns that weren't originally designed to accommodate them either, should tape be considered insufficient. |
|
|
WA, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:56:56 PM EDT
[#38]
So they know due to the bumpstock ruling and ADA that this will be struck down. That’s why they eliminated the worksheet. The challenge will take at least 120 days. So they’ll get as many on record with a form 1 as is possible before the ruling.
Look over here, a shiny stamp!!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:57:42 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Spade: Page 232 They're claiming the number of people with braces must be low because only 158 people turned in bump stocks. lol |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:58:37 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rollpin: So the 120 day thing... does that mean they aren't enforcing the rule for 120 days or just that someone has 120 days to comply in some fashion? On day 90, someone has a braced pistol and is pulled over... 30 days to comply still or charged with possession of an SBR? Ot means you have 120 days to comment and make a stink and after that they decode hiw they will proceed. M855 and other proposed rule changed have been decided against after the comment period. In light of the 2a, Bruen, the bumpstock reversal, and many other cases won-why are people acting like this is even remotely constitutional and worth a 2nd thought? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:59:06 PM EDT
[#41]
The ATF will need large banner signs in front of Walmart to make this even begin to work.
But, they know that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:59:20 PM EDT
[#42]
Comments Received
"Many commenters questioned ATF’s assertion that this rule will improve public safety and believed that there is no evidence to demonstrate that Americans will be safer if this rule goes into effect. Commenters asserted that criminals are not going to care about this rule and that this rule will do nothing to prevent or mitigate actual criminal activity." Department Response "The Department disagrees with commenters that the rule has no value or that there is no benefit to the rule. The perception that the rule serves no function to enhance public safety is directly opposed to the purpose and intent of the NFA. Congress passed that statute for the express purpose of regulating specific firearms, like short-barreled rifles, which Congress determined posed a greater risk to public safety as “gangster-type” weapons of an especially unusual and dangerous nature." |
|
|
|
TN, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:59:30 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mancow: It says you have to render it inop or get rid of it. However, it says it doesn't apply to 16"+ "rifles". So, what if you only have 16" rifles? What if you have a mix of both pistols and rifles. Does the mere existence of a pistol upper and a brace in the same location constitute some sort of "constructive intent"? This shit is retarded. I believe you mean "constructive possession". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:59:45 PM EDT
[#44]
is a registered braced pistol, still considered a pistol?
|
|
|
|
WV, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 3:59:55 PM EDT
[#45]
From the FAQ:
10. ONCE THE FIREARM IS REGISTERED AS A SHORT-BARRELED RIFLE (SBR) CAN I REMOVE/CHANGE THE “STABILIZING BRACE” OR ATTACH AN ITEM MARKETED AS A STOCK? IF SO, AM I REQUIRED TO NOTIFY ATF IN ADVANCE? • Yes, the firearm is registered as an SBR, and you can change out the “brace” device or stock for a different brace or stock. You do not need to contact ATF/NFA because changing the brace/stock does not change the configuration of the SBR. However, if the length of the firearm has changed you will need to notify the NFA Division. ONCE THE FIREARM IS REGISTERED, AM I REQUIRED TO MARK THE FIREARM SINCE I MANUFACTURED A SHORT-BARRELED RIFLE (SBR)? • If the SBR equipped with a “stabilizing brace” is registered within the 120-day tax forbearance period, the possessor is allowed to adopt the markings on the firearm. The maker’s marking exception is only applicable to firearms that are registered pursuant to the final rule. If the firearm is a personally made firearm, the possessor must mark in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 & 479.102 prior to submitting the E-Form 1. MISCELLANEOUS Free SBRs and you don't have to mark them. Good if you were about to do some anyway. Bad for every other reason. |
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 4:00:19 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Third_Rail: 0" x 0". What if you take one of those MPA Mac clones and shoulder the square area at the back of the receiver? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 4:00:26 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By odiedodi: So long as you have a single brace >Attach to one gun >take photo >attach to the next gun you want a free stamp for >take photo Rinse and repeat. The question is how goofy they'll allow people to get. If you duct tape a brace to a glock, does that count? It wouldn't be too hard to jury rig up a more sturdy dohicky than tape to mount them to guns that weren't originally designed to accommodate them either, should tape be considered insufficient. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By odiedodi: Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN: With the pictures you send when submitting? >Attach to one gun >take photo >attach to the next gun you want a free stamp for >take photo Rinse and repeat. The question is how goofy they'll allow people to get. If you duct tape a brace to a glock, does that count? It wouldn't be too hard to jury rig up a more sturdy dohicky than tape to mount them to guns that weren't originally designed to accommodate them either, should tape be considered insufficient. That would be “making” a new SBR. If you have a new brace you need it installed before the rule is published. Enforcement starts NOW on making new. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 4:00:43 PM EDT
[#48]
Which one of you fudds was this?
Onecommenter,whoidentifiedasaformergunsmithandlicenseewith experience in the firearms industry for over 15 years, stated that he has “never seen anyoneutilizeabraceinthemannerthatitwasoriginallydesigned.” Thecommenter also stated that he has “often found that the vast majority of ‘brace’ designs cannot be actually used as intended.” The commenter pointed out several types of weapons with braces, such as the CZ Evo Scorpion pistol, which are “clearly [weapons] designed to be firedfromtheshoulder.” Thecommenterstronglyurgedthatalltheseweaponsshouldbe reclassified as NFA weapons, which is how he believes they should have been initially designated |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 4:00:48 PM EDT
[#49]
Don’t forget about 922r (if that sort of thing concerns you
). How many braced foreign made MP5’s, CZ Scorpions, Stribogs, AK’s (and more I’m not thinking of) are out there that could be made of 100% foreign parts as pistols. Now as rifles once SBR’d will need to have additional parts swapped with US made parts to be compliant. Again if you’re concerned with such things. 
|
|
|
|
MT, USA
|
Posted: 1/13/2023 4:01:26 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ben: What if there was a bunch of guys overseas with AR pistols stored various places back home- who cannot provide pictures or a notorized copy of their trust while overseas...and who won't be back til well after the rule is in affect? Hmm. I know more than several folks in this situation. Could be fun to play out. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ben: Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN: Originally Posted By odiedodi: They literally have no way to prove that. This is about to turn into a trash fire. With the pictures you send when submitting? What if there was a bunch of guys overseas with AR pistols stored various places back home- who cannot provide pictures or a notorized copy of their trust while overseas...and who won't be back til well after the rule is in affect? Hmm. I know more than several folks in this situation. Could be fun to play out. Well it won't be fucking boring that's for sure.
|
|
|
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.
Attached File
