I am confused. Is the ATF forcing pistol braced firearms to be legally "SBR"s or are they creating an entirely new and separate NFA category of “Pistol Braced Firearms” where said firearm is required to have a pistol brace on it? Or are the pistol braced firearms just being lumped into the SBR category and you can Form 1 them and then throw your pistol brace away and legally put a real stock on the firearm?
They’re considered SBRs based on the brace and some other criteria. No special category, just run of the mill SBRs. The ATF considers them essentially unregistered SBRs, and is generously (/s) offering to waive the tax if you Form 1 them within 120 days of the rule being published in the federal register.
they use to be 2 separate things , now they are saying a brace is considered a “stock” , so if you keep the brace on it will be considered a SBR subject to NFA guidelines
remove the brace it remains a “pistol” so not doing away with pistols , just saying a stabilizing brace is now considered a shouldering device in turn not conducive with a pistol , yet Lugers and Broom handles have shouldering devices and are considered pistols with those attached
so lose the brace it remains a pistol , keep the brace its now a SBR , im confident as the bump stocks it will be over turned
The first time I came across a dude shooting a “brace”, I was like… this is sketchy. It was completely an SBR. That said, the idea of SBR being NFA is totally retarded. It’s like saying a “switch blade”/automatic knife is more dangerous. Just stupid.
Thanks! So if you wanted to SBR an AR this is a good opportunity to save $200?
What if the mfr markings came with and xfer’d via 4473. If the item was not inventoried as a pistol could you still get free stamp?
Look at it this way. The dummies at ATF are forcing two things. Either SBR your as-is braced-pistol item, or remove the rear attachment to keep it a pistol and thus easier to conceal.
Well, it would have either been a “handgun” or a “other firearm” as those are the only two legitimate options for one of these on a 4473. Marking it a “long gun” would have been incorrect and a ****-up on the part of your FFL.
But at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter as the approved Form 1 transforms it into a Short Barreled Rifle regardless of how it was originally classified. Application to Make and Register…
people used to just take a rifle buffer on their pistol and stick that on their collar bone with foam on the tube
i was firmly in the Form 1 crowd , but more and more research the whole thing just came across more and more sketchy , then the bump stock was overturned ,and that flipped me into the screw them camp and here is why
this thing will be litigated all the way to the supreme court and the reversal of the bump stock creates a path to get this rule tossed , its all about the phrase common use , part of the bump stock argument was that the stock was not a firearm , it did not covert a firearm to full auto as the ARF contested , the other part they leaned on was the term “common use” , since this term was used and ultimately attached to the overturning of bump stocks it be used as weight in other arguments , there is no way even close to the numbers of bump stocks out there in comparison to braces
now , factor in that there is undeniable proof the ATF had first hand in green lighting braces , and then in turn allowing their popularity grow for 10 long years and , you guessed it create “common use” to become a large part of gun culture , low estimates of more than 40 million , only to one day wake up and say no , now they are illegal
lets pile on , the WV /EPA decision that states government agencies can not , and do not posses the power to usurp the legislation branch to create law with federal implications to citizens that include jail and fines , which is precisely what is happening here
not done yet , the constitution explicitly states that the government can not under any circumstance impose a tax on a inalienable freedom liberty of a constitutional right , ie a tax stamp on a firearm that is established as common use , the term common use is important because it negates gun controllers long time crutch argument that they did not have AR 15 rifles when the constitution was written , but they did say common use , so as advancements in firearms the normal also advances , it was either Bruin or Heller that we won that battle
so theoretically the taxing of weapons that are of a common use is unconstitutional and that the NFA system is in turn unconstitutional , this is where it really stings for gun controllers , their over reach could have laid the groundwork for the abolishment of the NFA , factor in the work being done in Texas in regards to made in Texas suppressors not being governable by NFA negating the federal tax stamp could add some big holes in whether the NFA is necessary at all , the ATF petitioned to have that case dismissed , and was quickly denied and the hearing is pretty soon , so theres a good indication on how the wind is blowing there
so in short after all of that , i will remove the brace and wait for this thing to work its way through the courts , and NOT register with the ATF
Have you seen the #'s of actual SBR’s and machineguns in the US? They are all in common use according to the #'s.
if we are being fair i would not say FA is common use unless you are a ghetto rat knocking Pookie and Loquacious of your dope corner
i agree 100% that SBRs are common use even under the NFA rule , the reason i separate the two is , outside of my service ive never seen a FA in the wild , yet ive seen quite a few SBR rifles , we can only hope they can use common use rule to remove SBRs from NFA , i feel we need to take it a step at a time , if we go at the NFA as a whole and try to golden bullet it and miss it can damage the fight as a whole , but if we chip away at NFA like removing suppressors , SBR’s we can strengthen the argument that the NFA as a whole is not only pointless but also unconstitutional and get it stricken
but the way things are stacking up is we have a great case to stop the brace rule so i will wait to let that play out and not go SBR , not only that sheriffs across the country have come out and stated they will not lift a finger to aid the ATF in enforcement ,and the ATF does not have the ability to do so on their own , so do with that what you will , if we lose i will remove the brace , im too old not to play the game right
as for suppressors , if Texas wins their Made in Texas suppressor case that sets precedent for all states to follow enabling citizens to manufacture their own suppressors , and sell suppressors within their state and only restricted to remain within the state of manufacture , if you were take a legal state suppressor and cross state line with it it is now back under federal rule , meaning if you made a suppressor and its legal in your state and you wanted to go out of state it would now be subject to NFA ,state manufactured suppressors will require markings as such , the bi product of this suppressor case is the individual States are starting to regain control to govern 2a on state level without overlord meddling , ie ATF loses its ability to rule over firearm and accessories that remain within any given state , in turn rendering the ATF inert
I no longer support the NRA , i support the GOA, i havnt seen the NRA in a fight for so long , factor in the misappropriation of funds scandal by their leaders ,im done with them, also i have 2 years on my current membership and last month they phone harassed me 17 times in a month to renew
if Texas wins their Made in Texas suppressor case
[QUOTE][/QUOTE]
I was not aware Texas was doing that. I’ll keep my ear to the ground with that.
ATF is very corrupt.
not real bright either , what about the janitor in Martinsburg Wv they allowed to walk out the door with confiscated weapons for years as he was selling them , it took years to catch onto him, how many of those weapons made it into Pookie and Laquatious’s hands as they used them to defend their dope corner in B-More , yet its us that are the problem
25 states are suing over this nonsense, I would take a wait and see.
my WV AG led the way on that
After doing a little sleuthing around, there’s a good % of legal folks who fear this illegal BS and went ahead and already filed the special form-1.
Many argued “I am already a form-1 user, so what difference does it make?”
The point of not doing what you are told by some BS govt dept, is to keep your stuff out of their MS SQL database. It makes no sense to willingly comply to their illegal BS so that they can inventory your stuff. I might suspect, with the multi state lawsuit(s) in the works, it may take longer than 120 days to reconcile, and at that time the ATF will just pull back their BS rule, but at the same time they already have all your info.
This ATF BS was well crafted, they already knew it would go to the courts, they already knew it would take longer than 120 days to go through the courts. ATF could have crafted any BS they wanted under that same context, and enforced it.
Question is though, why is there no temp injunction yet? Something to just put a pause on the end date of their 120 day limit. Then if that injunction is lifted the end date gets pushed out accordingly. Makes 100% sense to do that.
I would say that it makes sense to go ahead and do it if you have a braced pistol that you were planning on SBR’ing anyway. In this scenario, you’re not providing them any information that you were not going to provide them anyway. The upside is that $200 is saved, no additional engraving is required, and you end up with a defacto factory SBR.
Only if it was configured as a braced pistol on the day that the ATF published the rule in the federal register.
Every AR I own was built on a lower transferred as “other”. That is the only thing either I or the ATF could prove or disprove.
Andy