Pistol Braces legal again ??

[kymasabe]

I heard a rumor today that the pistol brace law is being contested and they're
temporarily legal again until there's a new ruling ?? Has anyone else heard this and can the rumor be confirmed ??

[9x19]

There have been several legal challenges, and some have resulted in temporary halts on enforcement, but I don't believe any have been Nation wide, rather they only apply to certain groups or individual states. I haven't kept close track, but I believe Texas is one where enforcement has been temporarily stopped.

[Oliver Sudden]

O”boy with ammo being so cheap and plentiful we need these to make empty brass!

[MC 1911]

Nationwide injunction handed down by Texas court against the ban. So as of now I guess they are legal again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHms...nnel=TomGrieve

[rickyrick]

I liked AR pistols, but I went ahead and converted them to carbines.

[44 AMP]

Pistol BRACES are legal, STOCKED pistols are regulated.

Moving to semi auto Pistol forum

[Quick1]

Here is a few videos with info:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUJhXN-hzu8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WoUUVvSLBE

[Swifty Morgan]

Two ATF appeals are possible.

The first appeal is interlocutory, meaning it takes place before the case is over, and can be filed right away with the 5th Circuit. The purpose would be to get rid of the injunction while the case proceeds. The second appeal would be to contest the outcome of the case itself, which has not been decided yet.

It seems unlikely an interlocutory appeal will go anywhere. The trial judge was very thorough.

It's pretty obvious from the text of the order that the trial judge is not going to give the ATF a victory when the case is actually resolved, so the next stage will be to take it to the 5th Circuit. Appeals of final decisions take a long time. On top of that, the 5th Circuit is not likely to reverse.

Put it all together, and you have a scenario in which enforcement is very unlikely to resume, ever. Nothing is certain, but this is the best guess.

[gc70]

Here is the court's actual preliminary injunction opinion and order. Scroll to the end of the document; the conclusion is only a single sentence.

[HighValleyRanch]

so is something like the RONI conversion a pistol brace?

[RickB]

Does it have a stock with a solid buttplate, or does it have a hinged or flexible appendage designed to be secured to the forearm while shooting?
The former isn't a brace.

[FrankenMauser]

There are two types of Roni conversion kits.
One type has a "brace".
The other type has a stock.

The latter requires a tax stamp.

[zeke]

Makes me wonder where that leaves the ones who got a stamp under the new rule? Say you had a braced pistol, then got the stamp and put a stock on the pistol to make it a sbr. Then there is a temporary injunction against the rule. Now the rule has been suspended, would the stock need to be replaced by the original brace?

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by zeke

Makes me wonder where that leaves the ones who got a stamp under the new rule? Say you had a braced pistol, then got the stamp and put a stock on the pistol to make it a sbr. Then there is a temporary injunction against the rule. Now the rule has been suspended, would the stock need to be replaced by the original brace?

My understanding would be that now you have a registered SBR, the injunction doesn’t undo your paperwork. But if concerned, contact the ATF.

[44 AMP]

would the stock need to be replaced by the original brace?

Not a lawyer, but I don't see why there would be any need to replace the stock with a brace.

You have the SBR tax stamp for your firearm. Your gun is now legally registered to be an SBR. ATF doesn't care what parts you put on it, NOW. If it is in a legal, approved licensed configuration, they can't make you change it, unless they revoke the license, and they need specific cause, to do that. (like you get convicted of a felony..)

Look at how we got here, and be sure to include the information the popular media leaves out or obscures.

Under the NFA 34, braced pistols are not regulated. AT ALL. STOCKED pistols are. Regarding the AR pistols the ATF ruled that if it had a brace, and the item was designed and intended to be a brace (no matter how it was used) then it was a brace, not a stock, and therefore not regulated under the NFA 34.

Then, later, (for various reasons I'm not going to list right now) they changed their minds and the ATF essentially reversed their ruling, and said "what was once a brace is now a stock" and since it is a stock it is an NFA item and you must register it as such.

They were "kind" about it, giving us the options of destroying the gun, surrendering the gun, reconfiguring the gun to full pistol, or registering it and getting the tax stamp. They offered a "sweet deal" with an amnesty period where you could get the stamp for free, and not pay the $200 tax.

The court has put a stay on the requirement. The requirement is still valid at this time, and remains valid until we get a court ruling upholding it, or invalidating it. The stay means we are not required to comply with the ruling, (and the govt cannot prosecute us for non-compliance) until the stay is lifted (or expires).

If you have already complied with the ruling, there is nothing requiring you to undo what you already did. If you put an actul stock on the pistol, then it IS an SBR, and you've got the stamp making it legal. This will not change no matter if the ruling is upheld or vacated.

IF you've got a brace the ATF says is a stock and you've already registered it as such, that won't change, either.

Clear as mud, yet?...

[P Flados]

Originally Posted by zeke

Makes me wonder where that leaves the ones who got a stamp under the new rule? Say you had a braced pistol, then got the stamp and put a stock on the pistol to make it a sbr. Then there is a temporary injunction against the rule. Now the rule has been suspended, would the stock need to be replaced by the original brace?

Your gun (lower) is now a registered SBR and that will not change even if they throw the rule out.

You can replace the brace with a stock.

If you want to travel with the gun, you now need to follow the SBR rules. You also need to pay attention to not allowing someone to be in possession of your SBR when you are not around.

If the rule gets permanently tossed, you should be able to have the ATF take it off the SBR register. This would allow you to treat it as a pistol again. The only reason I could see to keep it on the register is if you want to keep a real stock on it.

[RickB]

Not a lawyer, but I don't see why there would be any need to replace the stock with a brace.

You have the SBR tax stamp for your firearm. Your gun is now legally registered to be an SBR. ATF doesn't care what parts you put on it, NOW. If it is in a legal, approved licensed configuration, they can't make you change it, unless they revoke the license, and they need specific cause, to do that. (like you get convicted of a felony..)

Look at how we got here, and be sure to include the information the popular media leaves out or obscures.

Under the NFA 34, braced pistols are not regulated. AT ALL. STOCKED pistols are. Regarding the AR pistols the ATF ruled that if it had a brace, and the item was designed and intended to be a brace (no matter how it was used) then it was a brace, not a stock, and therefore not regulated under the NFA 34.

Then, later, (for various reasons I'm not going to list right now) they changed their minds and the ATF essentially reversed their ruling, and said "what was once a brace is now a stock" and since it is a stock it is an NFA item and you must register it as such.

They were "kind" about it, giving us the options of destroying the gun, surrendering the gun, reconfiguring the gun to full pistol, or registering it and getting the tax stamp. They offered a "sweet deal" with an amnesty period where you could get the stamp for free, and not pay the $200 tax.

The court has put a stay on the requirement. The requirement is still valid at this time, and remains valid until we get a court ruling upholding it, or invalidating it. The stay means we are not required to comply with the ruling, (and the govt cannot prosecute us for non-compliance) until the stay is lifted (or expires).

If you have already complied with the ruling, there is nothing requiring you to undo what you already did. If you put an actul stock on the pistol, then it IS an SBR, and you've got the stamp making it legal. This will not change no matter if the ruling is upheld or vacated.

IF you've got a brace the ATF says is a stock and you've already registered it as such, that won't change, either.

Clear as mud, yet?...

And, NFA has some weird requirements regarding transportation across state lines?
A lot of gun control assumes only pistols are used for defense, so those laws regarding carrying, storage, or transport that allow more latitude for handguns, won't apply to a SBR.

[reddog81]

Originally Posted by zeke

Makes me wonder where that leaves the ones who got a stamp under the new rule? Say you had a braced pistol, then got the stamp and put a stock on the pistol to make it a sbr. Then there is a temporary injunction against the rule. Now the rule has been suspended, would the stock need to be replaced by the original brace?

Page 4 of my eform lists Conditional Approval - Pursuant to ATF final rule 2021R-08F. I would assume the SBR registration is still valid while they work out the all the law suits, however if it all gets shot down then I'm not sure what happens.

It's my understanding that if the rule is thrown out, the SBR registrations are thrown out... However I have no idea how exactly that works or if it is true...

[44 AMP]

It's my understanding that if the rule is thrown out, the SBR registrations are thrown out... However I have no idea how exactly that works or if it is true...

That MAY be what happens, but I don't see where it would have to happen.

Remember we are talking about two separate things, the NFA 34, and the ATF ruling on certain pistol "braces". Invalidating the ATF rule has no effect on the NFA.

[reddog81]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

That MAY be what happens, but I don't see where it would have to happen.

Remember we are talking about two separate things, the NFA 34, and the ATF ruling on certain pistol "braces". Invalidating the ATF rule has no effect on the NFA.

The way I read my SBR approval, that I submitted tax exempt during the pistol brace amnesty period, is that it is conditionally approved pursuant to the rule 2021R-08F becoming effective. This only applies to people who had a braced pistol and then applied for the SBR approval. This wouldn't impact anyone else.

In the event that the ruling is thrown out and a huge chunk of the people who received conditional approval would have no idea the SBR that they received ATF "conditional approval" for is now no longer approved. This could be quite the fiasco. I imagine the ATF could decide any variety of a number of ways to handle it. I hope the pistol brace rules get thrown out but at the same time do not want my free SBR to also be revoked. The ATF has kind of stepped into a giant pile of dog doo with this.

[44 AMP]

I hope the pistol brace rules get thrown out but at the same time do not want my free SBR to also be revoked.

Looks like the ATF has set it up so you don't get it both ways.

[Adventurer 2]

I see Palmetto State Armory is selling pistols with braces again.

[STORM2]

What day of the week is it?

[Dashunde]

Next, instead of fighting it in the 5th, our overlords will - after a decade saying its Ok - circle back around and say shouldering a brace makes you a felon holding a SBR (again). Those of us in red and 2nd sanctuary states are fairly safe, but those of you with democrat prosecutors better watch out*.
Read about Mark and Patricia McCloskey in St Louis.

Also, I for example, am surrounded by BLM land - that's federal - Do not take your braced pistols into the BLM (or any federal land/park) even if you're in a solid red state. The federal Ranger you run into may not be 2a friendly*.

*Remember, the brace issue is political and the law is on the books, the case is in the courts, they can still arrest you and let a court sort it out later - much later and many thousands of $$ later if its not dismissed right away at arraignment by a well-informed and fair judge (roll the dice).

Lastly, until one of these cases clears the SCOTUS don't be videoing yourself with any braced pistol, especially if you're not an FFL or already have a stamp.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Dashunde

Read about Mark and Patricia McCloskey in St Louis.

I’m pretty pro 2A. I don’t consider them a good example of practically anything in terms of the actions private citizens should take.