Impending Brace Rule and Product Offerings

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

giggitygiggity

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
2,251
The ATF is expected to release the final rule on braces, possibly as early as April 2022 according to some sources. Essentially, the rule applies a subjective, arbitrary, and capricious standard to braces firearms. Essentially, the combination of certain features of the firearm and brace may mean that the braced firearm is an SBR in the ATF’s eyes.

Many firearms are sold with braces included, the most popular appearing to be the SB Tactical SBA3. Under the expected final rule, there are few, if any, configurations that will not be considered SBRs if using the SBA3 and other popular braces.

I am curious if gun manufacturers and/or retailers will use the brace rule as an opportunity to make more profit. Specifically, if Manufacturer ABC previously offered their AR pistol with brace for $850 and the new rule results in Manufacturer ABC having to either sell it as an SBR or remove the brace, will Manufacturer ABC remove the brace and continue to sell the firearm for $850 or will Manufacturer ABC do the right thing and sell it for $850 minus the cost of the brace?

I am bringing this up because if any firearm manufacturers/retailers see this thread, please realize that customers like me will watch to see how you respond.

The bottom line is that the good companies will refrain from charging the braced-configuration price for a firearm that does not contain a brace after the final rule, provided no other features change.

Ideally, more people will do what I did and write a pointed email to their reps in Congress and the Senate to explain the ATF’s overreaches including the brace rule, frames/receivers rule, illegitimate prosecutions, ridiculous Valentine’s Day tweet, and demand that Congress and the Senate reign in the ATF. When an anti-2A politician replies that they think the ATF should have wide latitude, I then ask if they will maintain that same stance if a pro-gun President is elected and directs the ATF to make rules beneficial to gun owners.
 
I’m hand wringing a bit as I just bought a lower kit with an sba3. I was unsure about what they will say. Under a hostile administration they will fold. Under the last admin we saw the ruling of bump-stocks go sideways. I’m hoping I didn’t throw away the extra money.
 
Extended buffer tubes reduce the wear and tear of the battering when the buffer fully compresses the spring and the bolt acts almost as a mini deadblow hammer to the tube and to the attached threaded extension on the lower where the buffer tube screws in. Standard buffers do not allow enough room to reach any part of the body to be used as an anchor for significantly accurate fire. An extended buffer comes back to the shoulder blade and allows a wonderful “cheek weld” and anchor point which allow for an AR pistol without a brace to be used for accurate fire.


And smooth backed extended pistol tubes are pretty comfortable to use. Especially when fitted with one of the foam sleeves.
 
I expect companies will side step AR pistol/SBR and make products that comply with the law. When the first ATF letter saying braces aren't stocks, the AR pistol market exploded. Companies and their lawyers will pour over the requirements and make firearms that are readily available to customers without doing SBR paperwork.
 
That... ^^^

Profit is the motivator. Any company doesn't make money if their assets or property is seized by the BATFE because they violated... or supposedly violated... the law.
 
I'd like to know what LGS are going to do with their own stock firearms with braces they received from their distributors. Remove them and get a refund from the maker?
 
giggitygiggity said:
or will Manufacturer ABC do the right thing and sell it for $850 minus the cost of the brace?
Click to expand...

There is no "right thing" when it comes to commerce. They will sell at a price that the market will pay - nothing more and nothing less. That's simple economics. If I had a widget that cost me $5 but people were willing to pay $1500 for I'd be a fool to sell them for $10 even though I'd still be making a profit.
 
I heard it a little differently. It is the frames and 80% receivers that currently has been rushed forward to april.

I can not read the link since I will not pay the NY Times any money, but below is copied from elsewhere. But this is from unnamed sources and who knows maybe some manufacturer is starting a rumor to speed up sales.

IF you have heard anything recent on the date for braces, please list the source of it.
A source would be a link like the following to the source of the story.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/04/us/politics/atf-biden-gun-reform.html

1646840844657-png.png
1646840886621-png.png
 
I am not buying anything with a brace until the new ruling comes out and we see how it fares in court and what happens.

For AR15 guns there is the face-cheek weld shooting that I will look into.
Below is Forgotten Weapons Ian M demonstrating. The bolt or slide of such a gun must be covered so your can put your face on the receiver. I think gun below is a KelTec that one can put the face on the receiver and the ejection is to the right. Will not work on a stock glock for example, but will work on an AR pistol.

upload_2022-3-14_8-48-23.png
 
I am going to wait to cross this particular bridge until I see what it is constructed of. Trying to predict what a government agency will or won't do is an exercise in futility, especially with our current government.
 
FAS1 said:
The new rule proposed by the ATF will require a pistol to fall within a very specific range to be legal. Here's the new worksheet to determine if your braced pistol will be compliant.
Click to expand...
I thought that was the worksheet distributed way back when during the comment period, to solicit comment / input? If so - what information do you have that this worksheet is likely to be reflective of the final rule?
 
Boy, sure would be nice if some industry magnates would start some lawsuit or something.

I guess it’s better business to just sell the next thing…:barf:


•>| New! From Blammo! The Face Brace! Now with chin conforming memory foam, and new ear pad! |<•

“This just released today, President Sleepy Money has just banned face braces as much too assault rifleish. After several pudding cups and a cookie, a new Executive Order was passed requiring buffer tubes be held in the center of the forehead, otherwise you may be arrested for using a machine gun…”
 
Demi-human said:
Boy, sure would be nice if some industry magnates would start some lawsuit or something.

I guess it’s better business to just sell the next thing…:barf:


•>| New! From Blammo! The Face Brace! Now with chin conforming memory foam, and new ear pad! |<•

“This just released today, President Sleepy Money has just banned face braces as much too assault rifleish. After several pudding cups and a cookie, a new Executive Order was passed requiring buffer tubes be held in the center of the forehead, otherwise you may be arrested for using a machine gun…”
Click to expand...
LMAO.
 
Mars5l said:
I'd like to know what LGS are going to do with their own stock firearms with braces they received from their distributors. Remove them and get a refund from the maker?
Click to expand...

The maker isn't going to be offering any refunds, why would they?
 
Hopefully, you'll be able to buy a tax stamp and keep what you got. With bump stocks, there were no options.
 
Balrog said:
Or you could just put a 16" upper on it.
Click to expand...
Or you could pin and weld a longer flash hider to make it a 16" barrel that makes it into a compliant rifle.
rbernie said: ↑
I thought that was the worksheet distributed way back when during the comment period, to solicit comment / input? If so - what information do you have that this worksheet is likely to be reflective of the final rule?
Click to expand...
That is the million dollar question. If it is not changed it will be challenged under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA
A Guide to Disability Rights Laws - ADA.gov
https://www.ada.gov › cguide

Feb 24, 2020 — The ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in employment, State and local government, public accommodations, ...
Click to expand...
 
giggitygiggity said:
The ATF is expected to release the final rule on braces, possibly as early as April 2022 according to some sources. Essentially, the rule applies a subjective, arbitrary, and capricious standard to braces firearms. Essentially, the combination of certain features of the firearm and brace may mean that the braced firearm is an SBR in the ATF’s eyes.

.
Click to expand...


Do you have any link to this or is it just more internet speculation? The brace fiasco has been going on for a while.
 
Someone wake me up when they actually release a ruling. I will continue to use my braces AR pistol right up till whatever deadline they present and then I will deal with it then...

I wonder how many thousands of bump stocks are still out there being use occasionally by people that have no clue that they are now an NFA item?
 
giggitygiggity said:
The ATF is expected to release the final rule on braces, possibly as early as April 2022 according to some sources. Essentially, the rule applies a subjective, arbitrary, and capricious standard to braces firearms. Essentially, the combination of certain features of the firearm and brace may mean that the braced firearm is an SBR in the ATF’s eyes.

Many firearms are sold with braces included, the most popular appearing to be the SB Tactical SBA3. Under the expected final rule, there are few, if any, configurations that will not be considered SBRs if using the SBA3 and other popular braces.

I am curious if gun manufacturers and/or retailers will use the brace rule as an opportunity to make more profit. Specifically, if Manufacturer ABC previously offered their AR pistol with brace for $850 and the new rule results in Manufacturer ABC having to either sell it as an SBR or remove the brace, will Manufacturer ABC remove the brace and continue to sell the firearm for $850 or will Manufacturer ABC do the right thing and sell it for $850 minus the cost of the brace?

I am bringing this up because if any firearm manufacturers/retailers see this thread, please realize that customers like me will watch to see how you respond.

The bottom line is that the good companies will refrain from charging the braced-configuration price for a firearm that does not contain a brace after the final rule, provided no other features change.

Ideally, more people will do what I did and write a pointed email to their reps in Congress and the Senate to explain the ATF’s overreaches including the brace rule, frames/receivers rule, illegitimate prosecutions, ridiculous Valentine’s Day tweet, and demand that Congress and the Senate reign in the ATF. When an anti-2A politician replies that they think the ATF should have wide latitude, I then ask if they will maintain that same stance if a pro-gun President is elected and directs the ATF to make rules beneficial to gun owners.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the heads up. I just wrote my Rep. I recommend everyone here does the same. Only takes a couple minutes.
https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

hso
  • Locked
Oppose the Pistol Stabilizing Brace Rule through the Federal Budget
Replies
5
Views
723
hso
hso
LiveLife
ATF pistol brace rule lawsuits
2 3 4 5
Replies
123
Views
8K
LiveLife
LiveLife
F-111 John
  • Locked
Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached “Stabilizing Braces” [ATF Proposed Rulemaking]
Replies
9
Views
727
GEM
G
LiveLife
  • Locked
Congress demands ATF explain why pistol brace doesn't violate 2A in light of Bruen
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
5K
Odd Job
Odd Job
Sgt_Mike1
Marking Stabilization Brace after approval.
Replies
0
Views
253
Sgt_Mike1
Sgt_Mike1
Back
Top