AR pistols with braces to be SBR???

[DaleA]

The headline is the ATF might start treating AR pistols with braces as short barreled rifles and then the owners would:

1. Turn the guns into the ATF. The ATF says this choice would be at “no-cost” to gun owners.
2. Install a barrel that more than 16 inches long.
3. Pay a $200 tax stamp and register it as an SBR.
4. Modify the brace and not sell it to anyone in the future.

I believe this has been discussed before but I don't remember if the ATF can do this on their own or if they need some kind of Congressional approval.

Also if David Chipman, President Biden's nominee for head of the ATF gets the job he might well be in favor of something like this.

https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/atf...#axzz6xJpGQMlw

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...?ocid=msedgntp

https://www.atf.gov/file/154871/download

[GE-Minigun]

The thing that’s interesting to me…years back when they decided the Street Sweeper was a Destructive Device, all you had to do was send in a F4 with all the information like you were building one and you got the approval back in a month or so…tax free. Granted this was 15 or 20 years ago so approval times were shorter. Wonder what’s changed with this…other than the fact they (Gov.) would be leaving A LOT of money on the table by doing it tax free.

[5whiskey]

The ATF has given the “pistol brace” buttstocks a free pass for a while. Everyone knows that guys but them now largely as a way to have an SBR without a tax stamp. Allowing the “brace” in the first place is an atf administrative ruling, and can be reversed without congress.

And no, this is a different animal than the almost inarguably unconstitutional bump stock bank. The law clearly says pistols = no stock. ATF has allowed the “brace,” although they knew (or should have known) it would be used as a stock. They could easily reverse course, forcing you to ensure your barrel is 16” or you have nothing but a buffer tube (which could still be an uncomfortable stock). It’s radically different than bump stocks where the existing law was flouted.

[Sharkbite]

I have had AR pistols WAY before braces existed. I also have tax stamped SBR’s. If the ATF wants a form 1 for all my braced pistols (3at the moment) without the $200 each, i would do that.
If the $200 each is required, i’ll simply take the braces off and have plain buffer tubes.

That tube is a functional part of the gun and cant be removed. So legally the tube is safe. Its the stock looking braces that are the issue.

[44 AMP]

This is an issue I foresaw early on, and as I expected, the ATF is now looking to change its mind, again. This time due to a combination of political pressure, and the blatant childish yammerheads on UTube virtually thumbing their noses at the law.

The ATF has a history of changing its mind about what is, and is not a regulated item under the NFA 34. At one time, ALL pistol stocks were NFA items. Many stocks and guns were permanently altered (parts ground off) so that the owners could possess both without either being an NFA item.

Then the ATF said stocks on some pistols (Curio & Relic) were not NFA regulated, and some of us got stocks (mostly reproduction stocks) for those guns that could take them. This was the status for several years.

Then the ATF decided that only "original" stocks were acceptable as C&R non regulated and if you had a repro stock it was an NFA item, if you also had the pistol it could be attached to.

They looked at the original AR "brace" and determined that since its intent was not to be a stock, it was not a stock, so therefore one on a pistol was not an NFA item.

Thanks to tons of idiots posting videos of them using the brace AS A STOCK, and our current administration's pushing, now they are considering reclassifying the brace as a stock, and IF they do that, then all the NFA regulations about stocked pistols can be enforced.

IF so, then I hope those kids will be happy with what they helped bring about.

Don't poke the bear, and especially don't wake him up and wave meat under his nose....you likely won't be happy with his reaction.....

[Aguila Blanca]

^^^ This.

It didn't take a Nostradamus to see this coming.

[Tom Servo]

They're going to a "points" system to determine whether or not an AR pistol with a brace constitutes an SBR. Here's the document. It's similar to the system they use to determine whether certain pistols are eligible for import.

People wanted to play games and poke the bear. This is what happens.

[railroader]

My biggest problem this is why did the ATF wait for years to do this. The ATF hasn't had their heads in the sand for 5 or 6 years but now millions of law abiding gun owners can become instant felons. Not everyone follows gun forums where they are up to the latest change in gun laws. These gun owners just know they purchased a firearm legally. What happens to them if they get arrested?

[44 AMP]

My biggest problem this is why did the ATF wait for years to do this.

I think the simplest answer is that the ATF is part of the Government.

They are part of the Treasury Dept. which is a part of the Executive Branch, so ultimately, they work for the President, and those people appointed under him.

Over all direction, (as well as specific direction on certain issues) comes from the Top, down.

The Obama ATF ruled bump fire stocks were ok, The Trump ATF did too, UNTIL one was used in a mass shooting and Trump threw them under the bus to appease cries he "do something".

Biden wants to ban AR pistols. Wants it badly. He can't. BUT, he can use the excuse that one of them was used in a mass shooting to order the ATF find a way to "do something". And, this is what they have found they can do.

Reclassify a PART on the gun, that (and one that has no bearing on the function of the gun) into something that turns a legal pistol into an NFA regulated item, the same as a "sawed off shotgun".

It's a WORD GAME, and the people who decide what words mean are always the winners...

[KyJim]

A lot of people saw this coming, including vendors. I've been getting lots of emails from vendors, large and small, advertising braces for sale. They obviously didn't want to be caught with a lot of inventory that will be hard to move. BTW, I don't own an AR pistol.

People wanted to play games and poke the bear. This is what happens.

Couldn't agree more.

[dogtown tom]

DaleA ...... I don't remember if the ATF can do this on their own or if they need some kind of Congressional approval.

ATF isn't changing a law, but issuing guidance and a regulatory change. Government agencies can do this through a process. It's how every government agency formulates rules and regulations (not just ATF).

[dogtown tom]

GE-Minigun The thing that’s interesting to me…years back when they decided the Street Sweeper was a Destructive Device, all you had to do was send in a F4 with all the information like you were building one and you got the approval back in a month or so…tax free. Granted this was 15 or 20 years ago so approval times were shorter. Wonder what’s changed with this…other than the fact they (Gov.) would be leaving A LOT of money on the table by doing it tax free.

Form 4 for is for transferring an existing NFA firearm.
Form 1 is for making a new NFA firearm.

[dogtown tom]

44 AMP
Quote:
My biggest problem this is why did the ATF wait for years to do this.
I think the simplest answer is that the ATF is part of the Government.

They are part of the Treasury Dept. which is a part of the Executive Branch, so ultimately, they work for the President, and those people appointed under him.

ATF hasn't been under Treasury for eighteen years, they've been DOJ since 2003.

[sfwusc]

If you do the tax stamp then don’t you register the lower receiver as a sbr?

[FrankenMauser]

The thing that’s interesting to me…years back when they decided the Street Sweeper was a Destructive Device, all you had to do was send in a F4 with all the information like you were building one and you got the approval back in a month or so…tax free. Granted this was 15 or 20 years ago so approval times were shorter. Wonder what’s changed with this…other than the fact they (Gov.) would be leaving A LOT of money on the table by doing it tax free.

Word from the inside is that a free tax stamp was taking off the table very early on, because of the 3D printing impact.
3D printers can kick out "pistol braces" very cheaply, very easily, and by any idiot that knows how to click the right buttons.

Give the 3D printer guys 90+ days warning, and each one can print enough braces for every pistol that they own, every pistol that their brother owns, every pistol that their neighbors own, every AR lower in the local gun shop, and many, many more.
They're afraid to open the door, since they cannot predict how many people will 3D print like crazy, in order to get as many free tax stamps as possible.

[44 AMP]

ATF hasn't been under Treasury for eighteen years, they've been DOJ since 2003.

really? interesting. Just show you how closely I keep track of the upper bureaucracy of the "alphabet agencies". They used to be Treasury....

Still under the Executive branch, though, aren't they??

[seanc]

Silencers and SBRs are movie boogie men. Neither are responsible for much mayhem and neither should be NFA items. Silencers should be considered safety items that should be encouraged. SBRs and pistol braced pistols are more accurate, which should mean a safer firearm. A pistol braced pistol isn't very concealable and silencers aren't very silent. The people that want to ban things start with the things that "everybody" knows no one needs, and then they move on to whatever's next. Just look at where they're at in England. Bumpstocks, 7n6, now pistol braces. Biden's pick to head the BATFE wants to classify firearms that accept high capacity magazines as machineguns. The comfortably smug who point fingers at the youtubers flagrantly shouldering their pistol braced firearms wont be so smug when their AR15 carbines are next, and then standard capacity semi-auto pistols too.

[stagpanther]

Probably the fact that "outlawing" pistol braces altogether would bump up against the American Disability Act and would not look politically appetizing since that would affect disabled veterans is a major factor I suspect that they will stay around in one form or another. But if the "in your face" loophole exploitations continue they may just say the heck with it and it's not worth the trouble.

[JohnKSa]

This doesn't look like an attempt to ban or restrict pistol braces to me. This looks like an attempt to clarify what isn't a brace.

I don't agree with the whole issue with stocked pistols and SBRs being legally restricted, but given that they are, I do think it's better than there be some kind of an attempt made to let people know when they are pushing the line on legality with their "braced pistol" as opposed to having to rely on the ridiculous and contradictory statements the BATF had previously issued on the topic.

[dogtown tom]

44 AMP

really? interesting. Just show you how closely I keep track of the upper bureaucracy of the "alphabet agencies". They used to be Treasury....

Still under the Executive branch, though, aren't they??

All Federal agencies are under the Executive Branch.

[dogtown tom]

FrankenMauser
....Word from the inside is that a free tax stamp was taking off the table very early on, because of the 3D printing impact.
3D printers can kick out "pistol braces" very cheaply, very easily, and by any idiot that knows how to click the right buttons.

Give the 3D printer guys 90+ days warning, and each one can print enough braces for every pistol that they own, every pistol that their brother owns, every pistol that their neighbors own, every AR lower in the local gun shop, and many, many more.
They're afraid to open the door, since they cannot predict how many people will 3D print like crazy, in order to get as many free tax stamps as possible.

Where did you read of this "word from the inside"?
I doubt 3D printing of arm braces had an iota of impact on ATF's thought process.

First, while a homemade "3D" arm brace is possible, if it wasn't submitted to ATF with a firearm then there's no previous ATF determination letter on whether it was an arm brace or a shoulder stock then the possessor is on thin ice on a hot day.....and that's what got some arm brace manufacturers in hot water.

Second, the ability of current arm brace manufacturers to produce an injection molded brace is much faster, not to mention cheaper than doing the same thing via 3D printer.

[FrankenMauser]

Where did you read of this "word from the inside"?

From a friend, whom I met through a mutual friend in the FPC. One of the few people that joined the ATF because they *liked* guns.

First, while a homemade "3D" arm brace is possible, if it wasn't submitted to ATF with a firearm then there's no previous ATF determination letter on whether it was an arm brace or a shoulder stock then the possessor is on thin ice on a hot day.....and that's what got some arm brace manufacturers in hot water.

Yea. That's the point. 3D printed braces fall into the same grey area as half of the "real" braces on the market. It doesn't matter who made it. If the goal is to make "unauthorized" braces go away, then you have to include the homemade in any free amnesty.

Second, the ability of current arm brace manufacturers to produce an injection molded brace is much faster, not to mention cheaper than doing the same thing via 3D printer.

Obviously. But you're missing the point. It isn't about the manufacturers that can make a million braces. Those braces mean absolutely nothing unless they sell. The point of 3D printed braces is that they can come from anywhere, can be adapted to any firearm, and if the ATF offered a free amnesty, people would start printing 'free tax stamps' in the form of pistol braces, as fast as possible. Commercial manufacturers don't get 'free tax stamps', the end user does. And the end user is where these 3D printed braces get created.

Just because you cannot understand the 3D printed gun world and the impact that it is having does not mean that it does not exist. It is a good indicator, however, that you may have your head in the sand. "Doesn't interest me, so it doesn't matter."
You are not alone, though. The gun world, as a whole, does not understand the 3D printing world - especially the 3D printed guns. Ignorance is the majority attitude.

3D printed firearms and accessories are all over the ATF's radar. About 30% of the "Ghost Gun parts kit" crackdown is worded to directly impact companies selling parts kits for 3D printed guns. --Not "80%" ARs, "80%" 1911s, or "80%" Glocks; but 3D printed firearms - like the MacDaddy, FGC9, Big Point, and CZAR.
The end result, if implemented as the ATF desires, will impact the "80%" market as well. But the wording is meant to shut down or severely hinder the suppliers of kits and parts for 3D printed firearms, while simultaneously compromising some designs for the people that want to remain legal (by way of the visible serial number requirement).

[zukiphile]

I've never been a fan of "pistol" braces just because they seem so grossly inferior as stocks, but my hat is off to people who find a solution to a silly problem (a grotesque regulation of rifles with short barrels), with a silly solution (a stock that sidesteps the over-reach only if it isn't a good stock). I could wish that people who push greater restriction would be more tolerant, but that's no more useful than wishing winter were a warmer season.

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

From a friend, whom I met through a mutual friend in the FPC. One of the few people that joined the ATF because they *liked* guns.

I've dealt with local ATF people occasionally over the last several decades, and the ones I've met have been polite and helpful with what I might call a customer service demeanor. Even where I am legally allowed to possess NFA items with any tax stamps, I've never gotten gratuitous hostility from any of them.

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

3D printed firearms and accessories are all over the ATF's radar. About 30% of the "Ghost Gun parts kit" crackdown is worded to directly impact companies selling parts kits for 3D printed guns. --Not "80%" ARs, "80%" 1911s, or "80%" Glocks; but 3D printed firearms - like the MacDaddy, FGC9, Big Point, and CZAR.
The end result, if implemented as the ATF desires, will impact the "80%" market as well. But the wording is meant to shut down or severely hinder the suppliers of kits and parts for 3D printed firearms, while simultaneously compromising some designs for the people that want to remain legal (by way of the visible serial number requirement).

The impulse to prohibit what one can't tax and control is unwholesome and echoes some of the worse developments in the decentralization of news coverage in the last several decades with the rise of internet media.

As to 3D production specifically, I am awed by it. The ability to make complex designs from complex materials isn't something I would have foreseen from people making plastic junk on home printers.

[seanc]

I know 2 ATF agents, 1 now retired and 1 current. Both are good guys that like guns and the gun culture and both have their issues with senior management. It's the political appointees that create the problems. Not every one of them is a dog-killing SOB.

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

But the wording is meant to shut down or severely hinder the suppliers of kits and parts for 3D printed firearms, while simultaneously compromising some designs for the people that want to remain legal (by way of the visible serial number requirement).

It seems the government wants all guns to have a serial number. The main purpose of this would be for a registration scheme...