Yeah, only with tech Hitler only dreamed aboutI am pretty sure that you know the answer to that.
View attachment 8050813
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 SubscribeYeah, only with tech Hitler only dreamed aboutI am pretty sure that you know the answer to that.
View attachment 8050813
Prior to the date it is published in the National Registry - it has not yet been published.It has to be a notarized addition with a date prior to the 13th.
Full disclosure on this video: I haven't had time to watch it yet. However, you can take whatever Mr. Halbrook says to the bank.
I’ve seen both in two different places. Just one more thing to add to the confusion.Prior to the date it is published in the National Registry - it has not yet been published.
Seen what in two different places?I’ve seen both in two different places. Just one more thing to add to the confusion.
Sorry. Two different statements in two different places about doing the special form 1 as a trust. I’d have to back to verify, but I’m almost certain that in the FAQ it said the pistol had to have been owned by the trust before Jan 13. I think in the actual rule document it said prior to publication in the register.Seen what in two different places?
ASGH![]()
Gaetz introduces 'Abolish the ATF Act' after ruling against stabilizing braces
Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., introduced the "Abolish the ATF Act" on Tuesday following a controversial ruling by the agency that tightens regulations on pistol-stabilizing braces.www.foxnews.com
This just popped up in my news feed. I like what Gaetz says in the article. Thoughts?
So as an aside, and I have posted this elsewhere, but has anyone tried to log into eForms in the last week? There are new "rules of behavior" and the first of the boxes you tick and consent to is access to your tax returns and/or return information regarding certain eForms. What are these certain eForms? No thank you!View attachment 8046582
This is interesting. Went on to look at the rule. Seems to me the only free tax stamp would be for a rifle only. Not a pistol and I’m guessing not an “other”.
Maybe this is for FFLs that have a FEIN. I hope.So as an aside, and I have posted this elsewhere, but has anyone tried to log into eForms in the last week? There are new "rules of behavior" and one of the boxes you tick and consent to (the first one) is access to your tax returns and/or return information. What are these certain eForms? No thank you!
View attachment 8051206
So...? What? You think they'll just be cool with you building a full on SBR as soon as the checks in the mail?Not sure if that was rhetorical or not because there are a lot of basic NFA questions getting asked, but traditionally you take possession or complete the SBR build when approved. But in this case, you already have possession of what they deem to be a SBR, so…![]()
Was what a serious question? Not being a dick, there’s a lot going on in this thread, I’m not sure what you’re asking about right here, but I’ll answer your other questions as best I can.Was this a serious question![]()
From what I’ve seen, it looks like as long as the denial isn’t due to failing the background check, you can resubmit via paper form 1. They say the special eForm window will close after the 120 days. My guess is if you’re denied, they’ll probably send some sort of email/letter informing you, probably with further instructions on what, if anything, to do with the weapon’s configuration in the meantime. But that’s just my guess.What if you're denied?
Man, I don’t propose to know for one second what they’re thinking or what they’re cool with on these “final rule” brace-to-SBR form 1s. The old way, of course they would not be cool with you completing a SBR before approval. But by their new definition, if you have a braced pistol, you already possess a SBR. That brings in some legal ambiguity about whether one HAS to keep the brace on until approval. If it’s already a SBR, does a real stock make more SBRier? It all gets pretty damn silly. That was my only point. I’m not recommending anyone poke the bear, I’m just saying there’s some potentially serious legal ambiguity going on there.So...? What? You think they'll just be cool with you building a full on SBR as soon as the checks in the mail?
No, it doesn't.But by their new definition, if you have a braced pistol, you already possess a SBR. That brings in some legal ambiguity about whether one HAS to keep the brace on until approval.
No, it doesn't.
Scenario 1: Barney Fife the dick pulls you over and sees it on your back seat and asks to see your paperwork. You explain you purchased it with a brace, as it's currently configured, and show him the submitted Form 1 to make it all legal in the eyes of the feds we all know and love.
Scenario 2: Barney Fife the dick pulls you over and sees it on your back seat and asks to see your paperwork. You show him an unapproved Form 1 for a braced pistol but he's looking at an illegal SBR with a stock on it.
Which situation do you foresee yourself doing better in than the other? In one you're doing everything possible to comply with ridiculous legal changes, in the other you're embracing the "one felony is no worse than the other" philosophy
I'm not saying you should be doing any of this. But if you're going to skyline yourself by filing, I wouldn't exacerbate it by illegally manufacturing a Class 3 weapon without an approved Form 1.
Buy you do you.
So maybe I missed this, but I have seen seemingly two opinions:
1) That you could register your ar pistol and then say fk off to the brace and replace it with a new buffer tube and stock since its now an SBR.
2) That 1 is bs and that its not going to be an SBR as we know it but some new class of registered gun and you can't stock it.
Which is correct?
WTF!???So as an aside, and I have posted this elsewhere, but has anyone tried to log into eForms in the last week? There are new "rules of behavior" and one of the boxes you tick and consent to (the first one) is access to your tax returns and/or return information. What are these certain eForms? No thank you!
View attachment 8051206
Well, scratch my thought SCOTUS has a brain:
![]()
Supreme Court rejects New York gun retailers' bid to block new concealed carry laws
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a request from New York gun dealers on Wednesday to block a slew of gun control laws implemented by the state's legislature last year.www.foxnews.com
SBR is an SBR, once it's stamped go nuts unless you have something in writing saying otherwise.So maybe I missed this, but I have seen seemingly two opinions:
1) That you could register your ar pistol and then say fk off to the brace and replace it with a new buffer tube and stock since its now an SBR.
2) That 1 is bs and that its not going to be an SBR as we know it but some new class of registered gun and you can't stock it.
Which is correct?
I was confused by this as well.??
To confirm, you think this is a good thing? Or are you saying SCOTUS does not have a brain?
Perhaps I read the article wrong. It appears SCOTUS will allow these new gun laws.??
To confirm, you think this is a good thing? Or are you saying SCOTUS does not have a brain?
That article didn't seem to go into the detail others have. The SC denied an emergency appeal and said the case should go thru the 2nd Appeals Court first. It seemed to be more about following the proper order than supporting the restrictive law. "Respect for the Second Circuit’s procedures in managing its own docket, rather than expressing any view on the merits of the case,” Alito wrote.Perhaps I read the article wrong. It appears SCOTUS will allow these new gun laws.
No, more gun laws are stupid and IMO unconstitutional. I had hopes that the SCOTUS ruling that slammed the Hochul admins concealed carry BS would have put a nail in the coffin; but it appears NY is hell bent to destroy 2A.
THe scratch my thought was scratch my thought I believed SCOTUS had a brain. Apparently not.
As said above, they didn't want to step in on just a temporary restraining order override, but they did make a pretty harsh rebuke that that court allowing it did it without any validation.It appears SCOTUS will allow these new gun laws.
And from that rebuke, there is no way it stands. Question is, how long will it take.Based on their earlier decision, it's not likely they would decide in New Yorks favor.
Don't give them any ideas!What's the best guess when this new regulation will actually be published in the Federal Register? We can buy and sell brace-equipped pistols until then.
Why aren't short-barreled shotguns included in the forbearance period?
View attachment 8051768
Sadly, I saw this coming way back. I always figured this was a bit of a cheat on the rule of the SBR. Whilst I think a SBR is more like a 10-12" barrel and not a 6" barrel, it seemed too good to be true and that they could change their interpretation and ban sales. I never really figured what they'd do in that instance; but, now we know. Make everybody that purchased an AR pistol, CZ Scorpion through LEGAL means a felon should they not register (and they know who purchases stuff...beware).
This is why when old-timers (back when I was a young'n) said..who needs 30 rounds...who needs this and that....I was always...like "EVERYBODY" that your RIGHT under The Constitution of the United States of America...give an inch, they'll take a parsec of space.
I do have hopes that since the bump stock was overturned which is "arguably" harder to defend the purpose, the brace should (if our current SCOTUS rules logically), fall under that same ruling.
I think a pistol is defined as having a rifled barrel. If so, the above is an AOW...What's the best guess when this new regulation will actually be published in the Federal Register? We can buy and sell brace-equipped pistols until then.
Why aren't short-barreled shotguns included in the forbearance period?
View attachment 8051768
The ATF might be a little more than embarrassed because they make it illegal to cut down the barrel and stock of a full length shotgun but when it comes from the factory looking like this then it's okay.What's the best guess when this new regulation will actually be published in the Federal Register? We can buy and sell brace-equipped pistols until then.
Why aren't short-barreled shotguns included in the forbearance period?
View attachment 8051768
I knew this was coming too when I started seeing guys put eye relief dependent optics on their AR pistols and the rear surface area of a brace started to look like a stock.agreed on that. the pistol brace was a total work around for an SBR. while i have plenty of SBR's, i steered clear of braces on non-AR types because i knew this was coming, just thought it would happen sooner and didnt want to deal with it.
i have 2 friends with scorpion pistols. will be interesting to see what they do. nothing i am guessing...lol. just dont rob a circle k with it and local sheriffs are not going to say anything if they rollup on you out legally shooting.
The ATF might be a little more than embarrassed because they make it illegal to cut down the barrel and stock of a full length shotgun but when it comes from the factory looking like this then it's okay.
![]()
@akmike47,Wait, would it be a $200 transfer fee plus the tax stamp...or is the transfer fee the tax stamp?
What if you were already going to build a form 1 SBR can you not still do that?
Those are not 'shotguns" those are AOWs - Any Other Weapons
many of us here already have registered stuff but I’m curious as to how many of you believe that this is some kind of plan to get to know where many more things are before they go full Canada on us?
That's true. However, take a full length shotgun, then cut down the barrel and stock to look like a Remington TAC-14 or Shockwave and see if you can call it an AOW.Those are not 'shotguns" those are AOWs - Any Other Weapons
ATF background checks auto-fail after 88 days of FBI non-response. They say that a brace SBR application that gets a time-out for a background check will result in an immediate enforcement action!
No only a treasury agent can demand to see it. A cop can detain you until they arive tho. At least thats what ive been told by people i trust. Ive also shot with tons of police and never been asked to see a stamp even in home made cansDoes a cop have the authority to ask for my tax stamp in the first place?
I'm assuming the background check is only a small part of the entire process. But the guy in the video may have been misinformed by the ATF. What are the odds.Form 1 submissions don't time out. Form 4 submissions don't time out. If either timed out at 88 days nobody would ever get an approval. Shit like this is why it's not been published yet. EL OH EL.