-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
PISTOL BRACE
- Thread starter Conrad101st
- Start date
Prior to the date it is published in the National Registry - it has not yet been published.
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.
Good luck Matt.
www.foxnews.com
(Matt Gaetz didn't kill himself either)
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
(Matt Gaetz didn't kill himself either)
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?
ASGHGaetz 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.
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!
Last edited:
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…
What if you're denied? Was this a serious question
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@LawnMM , I get what you’re saying 100%, and my gut says that’s probably going to be their take as well. I’m just pointing out that legally they are contradicting themselves if they take that tack. Like I said, I’m not advocating that anyone skyline themselves or go poking the bear.
Well, scratch my thought SCOTUS has a brain:
www.foxnews.com
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
It's what they do. @J. W.
Contradict themselves constantly based on the political whims of those in office controlling their funding and existence.
Me, I liked having a pistol for travel, so I'll be making further modifications to maintain pistol status. It's my travel gun. Already have an SBR and will probably be Form 1'ing another.
Still want an AR pistol for traveling.
Contradict themselves constantly based on the political whims of those in office controlling their funding and existence.
Me, I liked having a pistol for travel, so I'll be making further modifications to maintain pistol status. It's my travel gun. Already have an SBR and will probably be Form 1'ing another.
Still want an AR pistol for traveling.
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?
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?
They'll probably make it a "new class" of registered weapon to keep you from having too much fun with it (IE putting a real buttstock on).
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.
??
To confirm, you think this is a good thing? Or are you saying SCOTUS does not have a brain?
SBR is an SBR, once it's stamped go nuts unless you have something in writing saying otherwise.
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.
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.
Based on their earlier decision, it's not likely they would decide in New Yorks favor.
.
This is a bad sign for pistol brace issue, because I'm certain this will not make it past the SC, just like bump stocks, it's going to cause a lot of loss for citizens in the mean time.
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.
And from that rebuke, there is no way it stands. Question is, how long will it take.
This is a bad sign for pistol brace issue, because I'm certain this will not make it past the SC, just like bump stocks, it's going to cause a lot of loss for citizens in the mean time.
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?
Why aren't short-barreled shotguns included in the forbearance period?
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.
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.
Years ago I was old school with foam tipped buffer tubes and KAK blades on my AR pistols.
Those are not 'shotguns" those are AOWs - Any Other Weapons
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,
AFAIK,there is no transfer “fee” in statute under the process of applying to register a new or transfer an existing firearm or suppressor under the NFA.
There is a “tax stamp” that is attached to the paperwork you receive upon completion of an approved transfer, thus proving the firearm or suppressor is registered.
That said, I have noticed that there has been a subtle change in the process. In the late 1980s and often since, one wrote a check payable to the U.S. Treasury in the amount of Two Hundred Dollars.
More recently, one is instructed to endorse the check to the BATFE, NOT the U.S. Treasury. I don’t know exactly when that occurred.
The significant difference I see is that one is no longer paying a tax to the treasury, but a fee to an agency for processing the paperwork.
It makes me wonder if Congress made a change to the law or something else happened.
If they're longer than 26" (and factory Shockwave and Tac 14s are) and not designed to be fired from the shoulder, they are not an AOW or an SBS. They are a Title 1 "Firearm" and are not regulated under the NFA.
One catch is that the firearm cannot have been originally manufactured with a stock.
Shorter than 26" overall length and not intended to be shoulder fired = AOW
Intended to be shoulder fired at manufacture (even if changed later to a birds head or pistol grip) + barrel less than 18" = SBS
Another catch may be that the ATF now considers braces to be stocks, so a Shockwave with a stabilizing brace might be considered an SBS (though I think ATF completely ignored smoothbores in the pending rule).
This is 100% my line of thinking.
To all of the asshats saying "pIsToL bRaCeS aRe a wOrKaRoUnD foR aN sBr." Fuck you, the NFA and the ATF in its entirety are work arounds for your basic human rights that the COTUS says the government has no business interfering in. I've been browsing this thread and seen it no less than 3 times. Wasn't aware of all the fuddery on the hide.
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!
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.
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.
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 cans
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.
So, this:
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
- Rudyard Kipling
AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
- Rudyard Kipling
AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
I don’t know anything about an 88 day rule but the whole entrapment/self incrimination thing has been on my mind. I’m sure we would all love to think the gov is being all benevolent here, but...
