The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 25, 2018, 12:00 PM   #76
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 2,327
The homemade silencers in the Webb case were not just "“old toilet paper tubes and stuffing from some old stuffed animals.” as footnoted.

They also included wire mesh.

(your link is to the appeal by Webb, not the original case)
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 02:43 PM   #77
9x19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 15, 1998
Location: Sherman, TX USA
Posts: 3,383
No point
__________________
Make mine lean, mean, and 9x19!

Last edited by 9x19; October 26, 2018 at 08:27 AM.
9x19 is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 05:47 PM   #78
Redneckrepairs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 9, 2006
Posts: 665
There seems to be two clear cut camps on this SBR/Brace issue .
On the one hand we have the " pistol " owners pretty much going nanana I didn't have to pay to have what you have . All i have to do is ignore half the opinion letter as to what is legal or not to do with braces .

On the other hand we have the SBR owners staunchly maintaining that the pistol is nothing like what they have and besides... Just wait till daddy BATFE gets home and tells you not to do that again . You'll really be in TROUBLE then because you didn't pony up a couple hundred bucks and forever file paperwork to take your toy out of state ... Like ME .
Guys .. no matter which camp you fall into remember we are all gun owners and we should just be happy that both SBRs and braced pistols are still legal for us to own . If little Jimmy down the street isn't running your flavor of boomstick I respectfully suggest that you find it in your heart to be content... nay happy that he has one and likely votes .

For the Record though I dont care if you carry your SBR loaded in a car or forget and put the short upper on it while out of state without a form.20 Nor do i give a hoot if your always shoot your brace from the shoulder . The entire set of " issues " is nothing more than nannyisim once someone understands the requirements to be and stay legal .
Redneckrepairs is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 05:59 PM   #79
CalmerThanYou
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2017
Posts: 305
Spot On^^ I cheer of every win responsible gun owners get these days which are few. With any luck we will get more "common sense" rulings in the future. A nice start would be to rekindle the HPA that had decent momentum.
We all know any of the standing regulation is fragile. I guess all we can do is vote, and voice our opinions to the right audience.
CalmerThanYou is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 06:57 PM   #80
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,326
There is no "win". It's a dead-end. The ATF just hasn't stopped traffic yet.

Quote:
The entire set of " issues " is nothing more than nannyisim once someone understands the requirements to be and stay legal .
There is nothing legal about using an 'arm brace' as a shoulder stock, in order to intentionally subvert the NFA by not registering the firearm as the intended end goal: an SBR.
Advocating for and trumpeting the illegal use of "arm braces" on pistols is the same as advocating for obliteration of serial numbers, and illegally hacking shotgun barrels to illegal lengths.

Some of you guys are so deep into the "grey area" that you don't realize you've crossed over into talking about intentionally committing felonies.


Quote:
(your link is to the appeal by Webb, not the original case)
I am well aware. I pointed that out in my post, because my link to the original case had gone dead.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 07:30 PM   #81
Redneckrepairs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 9, 2006
Posts: 665
Quote:
There is nothing legal about using an 'arm brace' as a shoulder stock, in order to intentionally subvert the NFA by not registering the firearm as the intended end goal: an SBR.
Advocating for and trumpeting the illegal use of "arm braces" on pistols is the same as advocating for obliteration of serial numbers, and illegally hacking shotgun barrels to illegal lengths.

Some of you guys are so deep into the "grey area" that you don't realize you've crossed over into talking about intentionally committing felonies.
I don't recall advocating anything other than a tongue in cheek attempt to get some of the more fractious members to quit this damned arguing and fussing at each other .
I am not an ATF agent and its not MY job to supervise anyone elses' use or mis-use of the weapon they own .
You seem to feel the need to shoulder that task ( at least on an online gun forum ) for whatever gratification it gives you to misread and nitpick what others post . Ill just point out that the price of being "absolutely right all the time" is that you never realize when you are wrong .
Good day sir as I am done with you on this thread and will continue to read it in hopes of some adult discussion on the topic .
Redneckrepairs is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 07:45 PM   #82
CalmerThanYou
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2017
Posts: 305
Well the vet's that started SB tactical, their attorneys and I consider it a win.

I guess if a herd of liberals pass a ruling that all SBR's are not fit for non-military or LEO use you may have a different point of view and a trail of paperwork bread crumbs.

Like you said, we shall agree to disagree.
CalmerThanYou is offline  
Old October 25, 2018, 10:29 PM   #83
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,635
Quote:
If your friend was in a hurry to sell it, the better option would have been to return it to regular 'rifle' (Title 1) configuration and sell it that way. Then the new owner could file their own Form 1 to re-SBR. The money works out the same, and the buyer has to wait either way. But the actual transfer of the firearm can take place very quickly.
I don't know how that would work, if it would. First, the rifle is registered as an SBR, no matter how long the barrel it currently wears, it is a registered SBR.

Second, the gun I am referring to is a semi auto M1 Thompson, not an AR, and so, replacing the short barrel with a longer one to turn it back into a regular rifle (if legally possible??) is not a trivial matter of a couple of push pins and a new upper".

As to "silencers", they are a different matter than pistol braces in one sense, but similar in others. The crime is the "intent". If you "intend" to use the brace as a stock, then its a crime. If you intend to silence a firearm (without prior ATF approval) its a crime. The silencer need not work, in order for you to be prosecuted AND CONVICTED.

Tough to "fail" at putting a pistol brace on your shoulder. SO, in that respect they are different, but the same as to intent being the criminal act, NOT the actual use. A small technical matter, to most of us, but not to the courts.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 26, 2018, 11:05 AM   #84
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,326
Quote:
As to "silencers", they are a different matter than pistol braces in one sense, but similar in others. The crime is the "intent". If you "intend" to use the brace as a stock, then its a crime.
That is exactly the point I've been trying to get across.
It's good to see that someone else acknowledges such.

An SBR is an SBR. (Unless it's a Title 1 rifle. )
A pistol with a brace is a pistol.
A pistol with a brace, built that way to be used as an SBR, is an illegal SBR.
As such, the entire premise of this thread is advocating the construction and use of illegal SBRs.

Quote:
I don't know how that would work, if it would. First, the rifle is registered as an SBR, no matter how long the barrel it currently wears, it is a registered SBR.

Second, the gun I am referring to is a semi auto M1 Thompson, not an AR, and so, replacing the short barrel with a longer one to turn it back into a regular rifle (if legally possible??) is not a trivial matter of a couple of push pins and a new upper".
Return an SBR to 'Title 1' configuration and it is no longer an SBR or subject to NFA regulation (this is how guys take SBR lowers to prohibited states without actually breaking the law). Notify the ATF that it will permanently remain in Title 1 configuration, with a request to be removed from the registry, and it will no longer be a registered SBR. Once 'de-registered' and in Title 1 configuration, it is just another rifle and can be transferred like anything else.

I am/was aware of the barrel mounting method for the Thompson. To me, unscrewing a barrel and stabbing another one in is somewhat trivial (even if pressing on a new front sight is required).
But, I will admit that my perspective could be viewed as a bit 'skewed' by other gun owners: I have two barrel vises, a couple action wrenches, and various other useful tools on my workbench. I also NEVER sell or dispose of a take-off barrel any more, unless I believe I will never have another use for it - or I at least have another suitable substitute on hand. So, I would have still had the original 16.5" barrel (w/sight).
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old October 27, 2018, 11:09 AM   #85
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,635
Quote:
To me, unscrewing a barrel and stabbing another one in is somewhat trivial
That puts you in a rather small minority. Most of the rest of us don't have the tools, skill or even time needed to change barrels on guns not set up with a quick change system.

I spoke with the owner of the M1 Thompson yesterday, and he corrected me on some of the information. He is not waiting on ATF permission to sell the gun, he is waiting on ATF permission to deliver the gun to his buyer. Currently he's been waiting 4 months. additionally, his gun is about 3 years old, and was bought as an SBR.

While you idea of "stabbing in" a legal rifle length barrel, and getting the gun "de-registered" as an SBR then selling it as an ordinary rifle seems plausible, there are obstacles to that in this case. One of which is its not revenue neutral.

A rifle length Thompson barrel would need to be acquired, IF POSSIBLE (Numrich does list them, for nearly $150, but is out of stock, I do not know if AutoOrdnance /Khar sells the separately)
plus the cost of labor to do the barrel swap (which you do yourself but we cannot) so the cost of a gunsmith needs to be added. So, now we have added a couple hundred dollars to the cost of the gun. And my friend estimates that getting the ATF to "de-SBR" the gun will also take months, 4 months, he said.

To further complicate the issue, I have an unconfirmed report that Kahr, after taking over Auto Ordnance changed the installation method for Thompson barrels, from the traditional threaded in, to a press fit. A press fit barrel is something possibly only the factory can do. Or possibly a fully equipped shop, but that is going to cost, take time, and add additional costs in shipping charges.

So, adding hundreds of dollars cost, months of time, to turn the gun into a regular semi auto rifle, with a market value LESS than the cost of the SBR and the work to un-SBR it, so it can be sold through regular channels is, in this case, not a cost effective solution.

With a different gun, such as an AR, it might be, but in this case, it doesn't look like it would be, and the owner turned down the idea, (and the cost), he'll just wait for the ATF to get off their ass.... again...

Is the SBR a dying concept?? I don't see how it could be, as long as the NFA 34 exists and the is a open legal civilian registry.

How POPULAR it is, is something that can go up and down, but its not "dying" that I can see.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old October 28, 2018, 10:44 AM   #86
PPGMD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Posts: 348
My opinion, no they aren't dying things are simply back to normal. When I made my first SBR I had to hand write the Form 1, send it in, and wait 6 months.

But then eforms came along with approval times as low as 4 weeks, we had a golden age of SBRs because making a SBR was trivial. But then the new regulations came about and killed that off. So the people that before eforms would've been on the fence of filing a form 1 and done the long wait now go to pistol braces and get 75% of an SBR, which is close enough for them.

I personally saw the writing on the walls and registered every unregistered lower in my safe while we could still use the eforms as normal.
PPGMD is offline  
Old October 29, 2018, 09:45 AM   #87
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,326
As noted by Bart today, it has come to light that the ATF has gone after an 'illegal SBR' for having an angled forward grip (Magpul angled grip) and an 'adjustable cheek rest' (Maxim CQB PDW Pistol Brace).

The man was acquitted, but still had to pay to fight it.
Most notably, the ATF wanted all of their determination letters about angled grips and pistol braces to be excluded from the case, in order to 'avoid confusion'.


Not everything that the ATF does is going to be featured on YouTube...
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 06:50 AM   #88
wild cat mccane
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 1,101
Can someone post up the entire ATF letter and not just the one paragraph that is always cited?

Because the next paragraph after saying shouldering is okay then goes on to say if the intent is to build an SBR using a brace, you have illegally maked an SBR.
wild cat mccane is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 09:00 AM   #89
TrueBlue711
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2011
Posts: 344
Quote:
Something else that I have not seen brought up here, but is very important to the discussion:

INTENT.
Proving intent is an important discussion point too. I'm not a lawyer, but I assume in court, they would need to have emails, texts, or statments from witnesses (who you bragged to about using the brace as an SBR) saying that you intend on using a pistol brace as an SBR. That or altering the brace to make it more like a buttstock such as adding padding on the back of it or something.
If they can't provide that, they can't prove your intent in court. It would be hard to prosecute based on intent, hense why there aren't really many cases. Even agasint the big youtube channels who blatently use pistol braces as SBRs for the world to see.

Could they attempt to prosecute? Sure. Odds of them trying without a surefire win scenario for them? Low. It's just another risk based decision where you weigh benefit vs. risk...just like driving 5mph over the speed limit.

Last edited by TrueBlue711; October 30, 2018 at 02:17 PM.
TrueBlue711 is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 11:09 AM   #90
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,326
Yes, it is.

My only comment on that right now is:
I do not believe it would be difficult for the ATF to convince a jury that you fully intended to build an illegal SBR if you filed a Form 1 on a receiver and built a "pistol" with an arm brace, to "get you by during the wait."


Quote:
Can someone post up the entire ATF letter and not just the one paragraph that is always cited?

Because the next paragraph after saying shouldering is okay then goes on to say if the intent is to build an SBR using a brace, you have illegally maked an SBR.
I've made that point dozens of times in other threads; and even highlighted the applicable statements, so that no real effort was required by the readers.
It never goes anywhere. The issue is dodged, buried, ignored, or the entire discussion turns to,
"Nuh-uh! You're a stinky pants and can't read! My dad will beat up your dad!"
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 11:50 AM   #91
GE-Minigun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2008
Posts: 100
The whole thing about wanting to read/see/whatever the letter from the ATF is a moot point. With the ATF…someone writes a letter asking for clarification on “X”, ATF reviews and “rules” on THAT “X”, not every other “X” that might look like or function like “X”. So the letter is worthless for anything other than that “X”.
Another thing I think most people have no idea about…some years back if you had a factory machine gun (not a conversion) that was broken, you could send it back to the manufacture and get a new one if the damage warranted the replacement. While the law didn’t technically make it legal, it didn’t make it illegal either. What happened, some guys sent a letter to the ATF asking for clarification, ATF ruled OK; however it kept happening. People in the NFA world said to keep your mouth shut and contact the manufacture and ask what to do, but people didn’t listen. Guy sends in a letter asking for clarification/permission…ATF thinks hmmmm, let’s take a “closer” look at this…guess what? Once the gun breaks your SOL because one guy had to ask for clarification. His reasoning was the law didn’t support being able to do it, but as mentioned it also wasn’t against it.
What’s all this means…NOTHING. However what “might” happen is some knot-head is going to want clarification on a brace and being able to shoulder it, fold it, paint it, make it or whatever and the ATF is going to say hmmmm…let take a closer look at this thing and bingo, there gone.
As gun people, we are our own worst enemies…I can’t count the number of times I’ve read a thread on (name a gun website) about bump stocks and someone says doesn’t matter to me if they ban them, it’s the dumbest thing to come along since…and this thread is close to that as well. There are guys that went through the process of an SBR (I’m one of them) and then there are the rest (brace fans). If the brace was around when I built my SBR’s I can guarantee I would have went with the brace and not the Form 1 route…the only reason is the money (I’m a cheap bastard). In the end we all need to get along and not worry what the other guy likes or we are going to shoot ourselves in the foot.
GE-Minigun is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 01:13 PM   #92
Sharkbite
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 2,956
Quote:
I do not believe it would be difficult for the ATF to convince a jury that you fully intended to build an illegal SBR if you filed a Form 1 on a receiver and built a "pistol" with an arm brace, to "get you by during the wait."
I guess my response (defense) to that would be the 3 SBR’s i already have. No need to build an illegal one. I already have stamped SBR’s in the safe.
Sharkbite is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 02:14 PM   #93
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: Potatoes and Hops
Posts: 11,326
Quote:
I guess my response (defense) to that would be the 3 SBR’s i already have. No need to build an illegal one. I already have stamped SBR’s in the safe.
Completely understandable. I would be in a similar situation.

But... If you already have three SBRs and you are not handicapped, what is the point of the brace? It would seem that its only purpose is to serve as part of an illegal SBR until the Form 1 comes back and allows you to manufacture the approved SBR to 'get legal'.

Throw that at a jury and see what they think.
A jury of our peers might understand it. The average, cherry-picked jury? ...Probably not so much.
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old October 30, 2018, 08:23 PM   #94
wild cat mccane
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 1,101
NO.

The letter cited on SB Tactical clearly says in the proceeding paragraph they do not quote that if you intent to shoulder it, you are illegally making an SBR.

The ATF is not being vague. It clearly says that.
wild cat mccane is offline  
Old October 31, 2018, 11:27 AM   #95
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 18,635
Quote:
No need to build an illegal one. I already have stamped SBR’s in the safe.
You could have 3 or 33, wouldn't matter, and wouldn't work as a defense.

SO what if you have no NEED. If they can convince the jury you had a desire, that's enough for motive. And that "desire" could just simply be greed.

The argument would be something like "despite the fact that he owned several, he wanted more, and he was tired of paying the tax and putting up with the wait times." or "he had several, but wanted one "off the books", unknown to the government, and untraceable"...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old November 6, 2018, 07:40 AM   #96
wild cat mccane
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 1,101
This is insanity.

People are quoting SB-Tactical's non quote of the entire letter:
https://www.sb-tactical.com/blog/sb-...lizing-braces/

The ATF letter clearly says nothing SB-Tactical is implying. The ATF is VERY CLEAR shouldering (not using the word intent) is an illegal creation of an SBR.
https://www.atf.gov/file/11816/download

There is no confusion by ATF. Any confusion being made is by brace/gun owners living in fantasy land without researching for themselves.


Shame on SB-Tactical for so blatantly lying and people not looking up a 2 page document themselves. Geeze.
wild cat mccane is offline  
Old November 8, 2018, 08:54 PM   #97
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,871
The ATF carefully worded that so they have discretion. Note how they leave some room for shouldering, but don't specify any clear line for when intent to make an SBR is crossed, if the original configuration is maintained.
raimius is online now  
Old November 9, 2018, 07:58 AM   #98
wild cat mccane
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 1,101
What?

It clearly states you cannot.

The wordage reads as if it happens incidentally, okay. Any other time, no.

There is absolutely nothing unclear in the letter.
wild cat mccane is offline  
Old November 10, 2018, 05:40 AM   #99
ncrypt
Member
 
Join Date: December 3, 2013
Posts: 69
https://www.sigsauer.com/press-relea...lizing-braces/

https://www.sigsauer.com/wp-content/...ch-21-2017.pdf
ncrypt is offline  
Old November 10, 2018, 06:12 PM   #100
TruthTellers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 2,137
I really wish we could get a petition or some message sent to Trump and have him make an executive order on Short Barrel Rifles/Shotguns. The law is so antiquated, it was made in the 30s when police were not as well trained or equipped as they are today and someone concealing a shouldered firearm under a trenchcoat was a massive amount of firepower.

The Marble Game Getter was an over/under .22/.410 AOW that Congress had to classify as "not a gangster weapon", which goes to show that the reasons the NFA was made was to regulate weapons at the time used by gangsters.

Today the police have vests, radios, training, strategies, and many other techniques to combat and stop a shooter using any gun, not just some SBR/SBS.

If I could write the Exec. Order, it would instruct the ATF to only prosecute people who use a pistol with a brace during a violent criminal act to be charged with violating the NFA law. All law abiding citizens who own braced pistols may use them in any way they see fit to effect a better means of self defense, hunting, or sports shooting.

Pretty simple and Trump has all the authority to do it. Of course, it goes away under a different president, but for 6 years we get to shoot braced pistols off the shoulder without fear of federal prosecution.
__________________
Any good revolver > Any good semi auto
TruthTellers is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09931 seconds with 11 queries