they would never charge someone for pistol with a bare pistol buffer tube
All it will take is for some crackhead gangbanger to get caught with one.
Cops will arrest, DAs will prosecute.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below! Subscribers get more entries, check out the plans below for a better chance of winning!
Join the contest Subscribethey would never charge someone for pistol with a bare pistol buffer tube
Oh somewhere in there it explicitly states something about them being able to prosecute for intent just because you have the parts, even if they ain’t mated up and you got some in the basement and some in the attic or some shit then they can get you in intent because you bought them to intend to put together. Lmao. So yeah they wrote it with the intent on it being this ambiguous so they can decide to prosecute people on made up shit, if they feel like it meets whatever their interpretation of illegal is for that day. Shit needs to be black and white. I’m sure the courts will agree, at some point. But how long is that gonna take?And it's implied that they may determine even a bare buffer tube can be intended to be shouldered, if they think other characteristics of the firearm suggests intent to shoulder (meaning things like a magnified optic). So apparently even a pistol with a plain buffer tube with no attachment might be an SBR now:
The assertion that the presence of a rearward component like a buffer tube coupled with the use of phrases like "may not be designed, made, or intended," and "could indicate that a firearm is not designed and intended" means other factors can be considered in determining intent and leaves them a ton of room for interpretation.
If an AR pistol with a bare buffer tube "may not be" an SBR because of how it's set up, in stands to reason that there are cases where it might absolutely be considered an SBR by ATF under their new rule.
And they've said they are not giving out blanket interpretations, or determinations based on photographs, but instead will only give determinations on individual firearms if you send them to ATF for evaluation.
I'm sure some will read the above quoted passage, give ATF the benefit of the doubt, and assume they would never charge someone for pistol with a bare pistol buffer tube, but to me it seems that they are intentionally leaving themselves room to do exactly that.
That would be MY interpretation but I'm not presumptuous enough to assume I know that's what THEY mean when they're trying to be vague and ambiguousacog, lpvo….
Love it.But, I have several guns and spare parts, which 'could' be reconfigured to be illegal, but also have valid, legal configurations?
This gets back to that whole story about the game warden who wanted to charge the women because the boat had a fishing pole in it but no license, but she said she could charge him with rape because he had a penis and could.
You should become familiar with:But, I have several guns and spare parts, which 'could' be reconfigured to be illegal, but also have valid, legal configurations?
That might be a good thing. It will wake up some of the do-nothing-ain't-gonna-take-my-gun-from-me-I'll-head-for-the-hills crowd.If this hold up, millions of Americans will knowingly or unknowingly not comply, some becoming unwitting felons.
Regarding #8.... is this actually a real-life thing? Can some people with disabilities continue to have braced pistols as far as this new ruling, or were disabilities ever a consideration beyond hypothetical?Option 1- Don't comply.
Option 2- Destroy firearm before 120 days is up.
Option 3- Sell firearm before 120 days is up.
Option 4- Replace short barrel with 16"+ barrel.
Option 5- Remove brace.
Option 6- Register with Form 1-Individual.
Option 7- Register with Form 1-Trust.
Option 8- You are handicapped and need a brace.
Option 9- ??
I was curious and logged into my Eform account and started to do a Form 1 Trust. When I clicked on Form 1 it does bring me to another site specifically for this new rule. Luckily I have a few mug shots to upload and extra finger printed cards laying around. Sucks but I fear it will hold.
Not sure if anybody mentioned but you can only do a Form 1-Trust if said firearm is already owned by a Trust otherwise Form 1 Individual is your only option if you're picking Options 6 or 7.
This info came from my friend who is handicapped and has maybe 20-40% strength in his hands and is in a wheel chair who owns 2 braced AR's. HOWEVER I could not find ANY info on exceptions for handicapped citizens in this new rule so tread carefully.Regarding #8.... is this actually a real-life thing? Can some people with disabilities continue to have braced pistols as far as this new ruling, or were disabilities ever a consideration beyond hypothetical?
I have an email into the ATF regarding trusts and SBR.Option 1- Don't comply.
Option 2- Destroy firearm before 120 days is up.
Option 3- Sell firearm before 120 days is up.
Option 4- Replace short barrel with 16"+ barrel.
Option 5- Remove brace.
Option 6- Register with Form 1-Individual.
Option 7- Register with Form 1-Trust.
Option 8- You are handicapped and need a brace.
Option 9- ??
I was curious and logged into my Eform account and started to do a Form 1 Trust. When I clicked on Form 1 it does bring me to another site specifically for this new rule. Luckily I have a few mug shots to upload and extra finger printed cards laying around. Sucks but I fear it will hold.
Not sure if anybody mentioned but you can only do a Form 1-Trust if said firearm is already owned by a Trust otherwise Form 1 Individual is your only option if you're picking Options 6 or 7.
We live in a nation where our Central Bank just adds zeros to the amount of dollars in circulation. I can assure you they don’t give a rat’s ass about making money off of tax stamps. If they did, they would have raised the cost from the 1934 figure. $200 isn’t even a drop in the bucket.I couldn’t figure out their angle on some of this, especially the fact that no one can register these to a trust unless their (then non-NFA) pistol was already in a trust before April 13, but I think I get it now:
Biden gets to toot his horn that he effected some level of gun control/registration, the ATF plays the role of benign benefactor by allowing “tax free SBRs” (how gracious of them), but then still collects a lot of $200 taxes from those that choose to register. But “wait” you say, “the tax stamp is free if you register within the 120 day grace period.” Yes, but you can’t register it to a trust. No one wants to register their NFA stuff as individuals, but they are mandating that for these braced pistols. Why? So they get their $200 when you transfer your shit into your trust later. They’re still getting their $$, just at the back door instead of up front. It’s about money. They’re seeing every brace as a missed chance to collect $200. This is a stop-loss and an attempt to recoup missed revenue.
FWIW, I don’t disagree with any of the above.This is absolutely about control. And if they can get even half of the millions of people who own braced pistols to register them, they are able to track where millions of firearms are located, restrict their movement across state lines, and in the majority of cases, prevent their use outside of one individual and significantly reduce instances of transfer to others by making it difficult to put them on your trust. Basically, they MASSIVELY increase the number of names and addresses on their registry.
All this to say, I completely disagree with your take.
Before anyone gets too worked up about what I said, I wholeheartedly agree with everything y’all are saying about it being overreach, excessive government control, and one more attempted denial of our rights.About money?!?
You know how I know you have no idea how our economy works?
Like people saying the vaccine is about money, I bet it’s a comforting thought. This isn’t little league evil, this is the big show.
Wait, would it be a $200 transfer fee plus the tax stamp...or is the transfer fee the tax stamp?(if anyone has one)
From BuckeyeFirearms:
Although the ATF states a 120-day grace period to register a pistol as an SBR, the ATF only promises not to enforce NFA rules on these devices for 60 days. The ATF will give a tax forbearance for the $200 tax stamp fee. A tax forbearance means that the ATF will not collect the $200 tax fee, although, by the law, you still owe the fee; it just will not be collected. The rule is set up the way it is because the ATF cannot waive a tax.
Gun owners must use e-Forms to file for the tax stamp. Only individuals would qualify for the tax stamp on devices with pistol stabilizing braces. If someone wanted to put the firearm into a trust, they must first register as an individual and then pay the $200 transfer fee to transfer it into a trust. Many people who own NFA items prefer having their firearms in a trust.
Some states do not allow for SBRs. Gun owners in those states do have options.
No engraving needed. Factory stamping/engraving will suffice they say.I’m curious also as to what they say about engraving during this 120 free period? SBRs have to be engraved and I have not heard any mention of that so far...
Where did you cite this? I could not find if engraving was waived in the 293 page Rule.No engraving needed. Factory stamping/engraving will suffice they say.
I don’t remember. It might’ve been in their FAQ. I’ll look and post back when I find it.Where did you cite this? I could not find if engraving was waived in the 293 page Rule.
From the ATFs power point...Where did you cite this? I could not find if engraving was waived in the 293 page Rule.
The $200 only matters as it pertains to you. Same with the wait and bureaucracy, they’re deterrents. They want you to throw it away, become prosecutable, or newly regulate millions of weapons. One of those videos estimated the number of braces in the 10s of millions, each one has become a hot potato. If you register, the number doubles.Before anyone gets too worked up about what I said, I wholeheartedly agree with everything y’all are saying about it being overreach, excessive government control, and one more attempted denial of our rights.
But if they don’t care about the $200, and maybe I’m wrong and they don’t, but if they don’t care, why are they not allowing the trust option? Just seems weird, even for the ATF.
Only applicable to the final rule! What’s the final rule?MARKINGS
• 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.
I mean WTF. The courts need to hear this before anyone does anything. This needs to be a priority.Plot twist:
Federal court recently ruled it is unconstitutional to require serial numbers on guns.
Clown fucking world.
If you register it you can do whatever you want with it.Just what I want, an SBR with a pistol brace instead of a stock.![]()
Are we sure that is the case? Or are you registering a “pistol braced SBR?”If you register it you can do whatever you want with it.
Are we sure that is the case? Or are you registering a “pistol braced SBR?”
I find it hard to imagine the govt opening up a giant loophole to exploit. But, I’ve been wrong before…
They are busy with the transgender bullshit...I mean WTF. The courts need to hear this before anyone does anything. This needs to be a priority.
Are we sure that is the case? Or are you registering a “pistol braced SBR?”
I find it hard to imagine the govt opening up a giant loophole to exploit. But, I’ve been wrong before…
Just what I want, an SBR with a pistol brace instead of a stock.![]()
How’s it gonna get you prosecuted? So you are thinking this is entrapment? It’s crossed my mind..Yeah, and a $100 hot potato stock that you have to lock up, can’t sell, can’t put in your trust, and might get you prosecuted. Pretty sweet deal.
If you register it you can do whatever you want with it.
But then you have the brace to contend with. It becomes "constructive possession", so if you have a true pistol, you’re placing yourself in danger.They do say specifically, that once it's a SBR you can do as you please with the stock.
As long as that’s the only AR you have, it probably won’t. But if you have pieces of them laying around, like I do, then you’re at the discretion of whoever is evaluating your property. It’s a bit of a loaded gun, pun intended.How’s it gonna get you prosecuted? So you are thinking this is entrapment? It’s crossed my mind..
They’re saying you can sell the brace itself. Who tf would buy it is another matter though.Yeah, and a $100 hot potato stock that you have to lock up, can’t sell, can’t put in your trust, and might get you prosecuted. Pretty sweet deal.
Yeah, I meant practically, not legally.They’re saying you can sell the brace itself. Who tf would buy it is another matter though.