ATF issues rule change proposal regarding pistol braces

Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Messages
3,182
Likes
570
Location
South Carolina
Finally chiming in here. First - ATF pound sand.

Second - why all the distress. Just pull your brace off and lose it in your inevitably massive box of parts, holsters, 80% lowers, and random accessories.

Am I missing something - what’s wrong with a pistol with a bare buffer tube? If the SHTF I can still shoot the shit out of it.
Does the new definition of "rifle" in CFR 478.121 and 479.11 mean that the any ar15 lower with the buffer tube is now defined as a "rifle", even if you remove and discard/destroy the brace, and replace the buffer tube with a pistol buffer tube.??

Accordingly, the Department amends the definition of “rifle” under 27 CFR 478.11 and 479.11 to expressly state that the term “designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” includes 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 listed in the amended regulations and described in this preamble, indicate that the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. The other factors are:

  1. whether the weapon has a weight or length consistent with the weight or length of similarly designed rifles;
  2. 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;
  3. 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;
  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;
  5. the manufacturer’s direct and indirect marketing and promotional materials indicating the intended use of the weapon; and
  6. information demonstrating the likely use of the weapon in the general community.
All of the objective design features and factors listed in the rule that indicate the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder are derived from the NPRM and proposed Worksheet 4999.
 
Last edited:

Caveman

NES Member
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
1,140
Likes
1,350
Location
Off the beaten path
This video came up on my feed, I really can't tell if these guys made an SBR or is that a pistol brace stock ???
It looks to me like a common type AR-15 collapsible stock but I may be wrong.



As for their misfires, the issue there is they have the wrong hammer spring for 7.62x39.
I had the same problem myself when I mated a 7.62x39 upper to one of my other lowers, but swapping in a heavier hammer spring fixed the problem.

looks like a side charging bca upper on a pistol lower with one of those previously taboo wraps that holds the arm flaps in place. aka quality build.
 

OMM 0000

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Messages
358
Likes
752
Location
NH
Saw this in my uubetube feed...

View: https://youtu.be/v59slk8IghU


Hopefully this will go through and put a stop to the atf BS.

I would like to suggest you all throw the Good congressman a donation. This is the type of action we want to see. We can vote with our wallets and reward this type of action.
 

Dench

NES Member
Rating - 100%
122   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
27,464
Likes
28,807
Location
SW FL
I give it exactly zero chance in this session. The solution is to repeal or invalidate the SBR/SBS provisions of the NFA.
In this session? Try any session. Every time theres a super majority approximatly zero cool things people want are passed.

They sure love to blame the other side of the aisle when this stuff doesnt pass but when they have a clear super majority off a sudden all these hack frauds forget about everything.
 

BarnBuilder

NES Member
Rating - 100%
54   0   0
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,231
Likes
2,427
Location
SW NH Living Free
SyZwaWQ9QXBp




View: https://youtu.be/DggOmUXxVWY
 

Golddiggie

NES Member
Rating - 97.8%
45   1   0
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
14,877
Likes
6,434
Location
Pelham, NH

At this point, if this stupid 'rule' doesn't get destroyed, you'd be better off NOT submitting your full information set to the atf (so they can ruin your LIFE) and instead go through the process to get/make an SBR instead. Yes, that will cost you more money ($200 per item) but that's FAR less than what happens when they decide to engage in the enforcement clause.

With ANY luck at all (I won't hold my breath) this 'rule' WILL be removed and destroyed. Along with all future versions that they try to sneak onto the books.

I wish we could get some positive traction on the movement to abolish the NFA completely. That would remove all of this BS from ever being thought up. Of course, with Dems being Dems, they'd STILL try to F us over for owning gunz. Because they're so damned scary (to those pansies).
 

Mesatchornug

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
8,911
Likes
16,188
Location
People's Republik
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
115
Likes
323
Location
New Hampshire
Not sure if this has been posted, pretty interestingly Fckd up! I took this off Reddit the other day. Basically says you have to keep the brace on the pistol and wait for your form to be approved before you can add a stock?? So what kind of logic is this? Is it or is it NOT a SBR with a brace? Retards IMG_20230120_094805.jpg
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
5,082
Likes
8,039
Not sure if this has been posted, pretty interestingly Fckd up! I took this off Reddit the other day. Basically says you have to keep the brace on the pistol and wait for your form to be approved before you can add a stock?? So what kind of logic is this? Is it or is it NOT a SBR with a brace? Retards View attachment 711470
It’s a stock-lite.

EA6C6695-2F34-44F9-952F-740479EEEA29.jpeg
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
115
Likes
323
Location
New Hampshire
BLUF: If an NFA application investigation exceeds 88 days it’s an automatic denial. And an ATF agent at Shot Show said if that happens with one of the stabilizing brace submissions, an enforcement action would be taken.


View: https://youtube.com/watch?v=mOA5R4sfO0A

Let's say everyone registered their pistols, there's no way in hell the ATF can process that many background checks in 88 days. Smells like a trap to me. Also there is no way this would hold up in court unless they revise the "rule" somehow to even something more ridiculous
 

Golddiggie

NES Member
Rating - 97.8%
45   1   0
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
14,877
Likes
6,434
Location
Pelham, NH
Not sure if this has been posted, pretty interestingly Fckd up! I took this off Reddit the other day. Basically says you have to keep the brace on the pistol and wait for your form to be approved before you can add a stock?? So what kind of logic is this? Is it or is it NOT a SBR with a brace? Retards View attachment 711470
Who the F knows at this point. The information I've seen/heard (according to atf) is clear as mud. Depending on where the info is coming from is what you'll see around that.
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
115
Likes
323
Location
New Hampshire
What about the 88 day background check? If it exceeds that you get a automatic denial. Now if you were doing a normal Form 1 or 4 that would be fine getting denied because you don't have a SBR in your possession. But now if you register your pistol as a SBR and they have your prints,picture of the weapon and address and ATF doesn't process you fast enough now your a automatic felon? Sounds like a way to me to make a bunch of prohibited persons
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
28,879
Likes
36,518
Location
NH (CT Escapee)
Not sure if this has been posted, pretty interestingly Fckd up! I took this off Reddit the other day. Basically says you have to keep the brace on the pistol and wait for your form to be approved before you can add a stock?? So what kind of logic is this? Is it or is it NOT a SBR with a brace? Retards View attachment 711470

If I had an item under question of this blatantly unlawful disaster, the absolute LAST thing you should be doing is telling the ATF until day 119. Once you ask the ATF you are admitting you know that you might have an SBR.

"Knowing" is a critical hurdle in any charges that may be filed against you. The Staples case is settled SCOTUS law on firearms that you MUST know or suspect something in your possession is illegal to be convicted of it.

Plus if you reg it as an SBR immediately and the kaw gets struck down, I doubt your gun will then be removed from the list. It will become an SBR permanently.

Just wait. There's no prize for registering on the first day and no penalty for submitting your request on the last day.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
5,082
Likes
8,039
Let's say everyone registered their pistols, there's no way in hell the ATF can process that many background checks in 88 days. Smells like a trap to me. Also there is no way this would hold up in court unless they revise the "rule" somehow to even something more ridiculous
So, it wouldn’t necessarily be from submission. The background check doesn’t start right away. That said, I could definitely see a bunch of background checks getting started by processors faster than the background investigators can actually keep up.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
5,082
Likes
8,039
If I had an item under question of this blatantly unlawful disaster, the absolute LAST thing you should be doing is telling the ATF until day 119. Once you ask the ATF you are admitting you know that you might have an SBR.

"Knowing" is a critical hurdle in any charges that may be filed against you. The Staples case is settled SCOTUS law on firearms that you MUST know or suspect something in your possession is illegal to be convicted of it.

Plus if you reg it as an SBR immediately and the kaw gets struck down, I doubt your gun will then be removed from the list. It will become an SBR permanently.

Just wait. There's no prize for registering on the first day and no penalty for submitting your request on the last day.
It seems like a serious 5th amendment issue.

I’m definitely in the don’t know what’s legal anymore camp after they seem to have completely changed the opinion without getting public input again. I read their draft they submitted for input. I don’t have time to read this 290 page monstrosity that they have pulled out of their nethers.
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
28,879
Likes
36,518
Location
NH (CT Escapee)
It seems like a serious 5th amendment issue.

I’m definitely in the don’t know what’s legal anymore camp after they seem to have completely changed the opinion without getting public input again. I read their draft they submitted for input

231 pages is not a clear regulation on a piece of plastic.
 

Golddiggie

NES Member
Rating - 97.8%
45   1   0
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
14,877
Likes
6,434
Location
Pelham, NH
So, it wouldn’t necessarily be from submission. The background check doesn’t start right away. That said, I could definitely see a bunch of background checks getting started by processors faster than the background investigators can actually keep up.
It's almost like that's what they're setting things up for. Get everything into the system fast to start the clock. Then let it run down on MILLIONS (potentially) of items so that they can go and perform their "enforcement action" on those people.

Agree that this should fall under "wait and see what the law suits do" category. Knowing how things have been running, in the final week (before you need to submit your papers) there will be an injunction enacted on the rule to stop it. So anyone who's submitted their papers up to that point is screwed. People that waited are still GTG with what they have.

This illegal "rule" needs to be nuked. The people involved in creating it (those pushing it and those not pushing back that it's illegal) need to have punitive action taken against them. Doing illegal shit should HURT for them just as it does for everyone else.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 25, 2022
Messages
1,727
Likes
2,998
Location
seacoast, nh
BLUF: If an NFA application investigation exceeds 88 days it’s an automatic denial. And an ATF agent at Shot Show said if that happens with one of the stabilizing brace submissions, an enforcement action would be taken.


View: https://youtube.com/watch?v=mOA5R4sfO0A

this is shocking. i'm months into pending forms for NFA items and the process is opaque. is 88 days just a way to put a denial on the record of almost everyone that decides to file for an SBR? i assume once there's a denial on your record with the ATF, only bad things follow
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
15,398
Likes
9,331
This seems like a good “summary”, it’s not short lol. The ATFs new rule is sooo screwed up. Some of the things like waving the tax stamp are almost certainly not even legal because the NFA tax stamp is required by law. A regulation cannot wave the fee when a law requires it. Typical govt, typical biden administration, it’s a mess. It’s unconstitutional so hopefully the lawsuit in the 5th is lined up


View: https://youtu.be/Xg4RnTWiazE
 

Dennis in MA

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
33,742
Likes
27,435
One has to wonder if they have competent attorneys or complete morons writing this crap for them. Maybe it's that 10,000 monkeys on 10,000 typewriters for 10,000 years thing.
 
Top Bottom