Pistol Brace Amnesty
- Thread starter SharpDog
- Start date
- Status
Until we know the final form of this everything is conjecture.
Glockpride
Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 83
Ex Post Facto
DustyGmt
Member
So we will have the definitive dope doled out by the ATF on pistol braces in December?
Sorry, I try to keep up but what is pistol brace amnesty?
Sorry, I try to keep up but what is pistol brace amnesty?
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,590
They want braced pistols to be registered as SBR's but are going to waive the $200 tax.
"Amnesty" is a very bad choice of words IMO, because "amnesty" connotes a pardon granted to a person who committed a crime. Assuming a normal 4473 was done for the purchase, any braced pistol currently owned was perfectly legal when purchased, and the owner never committed any crime by owning it.
Last edited:
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,590
One question I have not so far seen addressed anywhere:
Currently if a person buys an NFA item, they fill out the paperwork and pay the $200 and then they have to wait quite some time for the ATF to process everything before they are allowed to use the item. Is ATF planning to also waive this waiting period? If not, how is that not depriving a person of a legal right?
Currently if a person buys an NFA item, they fill out the paperwork and pay the $200 and then they have to wait quite some time for the ATF to process everything before they are allowed to use the item. Is ATF planning to also waive this waiting period? If not, how is that not depriving a person of a legal right?
I want my AR/M4 pistol to remain a legally-defined handgun, because I can carry a handgun, legally, on or about my person, more places than I can legally carry/possess a long gun, on or about my person. So, I have no desire to “SBR” a handgun, as that would relegate it to long gun status.
I do, however, have to pay very close attention, to the language of any changes, because my DDM4 V7P is the version with the factory-installed LAW folder. When a bureaucrat sits down, to write a rule/regulation, weird things sometimes happen, so, I would need to be careful that the LAW folding mechanism does not get written-in as a defining characteristic of an SBR, lumped-in there with braces. (Perhaps, the bureaucrat might remember “the shoulder thing that goes up,” as being an evil characteristic.)
I do, however, have to pay very close attention, to the language of any changes, because my DDM4 V7P is the version with the factory-installed LAW folder. When a bureaucrat sits down, to write a rule/regulation, weird things sometimes happen, so, I would need to be careful that the LAW folding mechanism does not get written-in as a defining characteristic of an SBR, lumped-in there with braces. (Perhaps, the bureaucrat might remember “the shoulder thing that goes up,” as being an evil characteristic.)
230RN
2A was "political" when it was first adopted.
I'm thinkin' nowadays there is no such thing as a wild-eyed crazy-assed conspiracy theory.
I wondered in another post if lanyard loops on, say, a 1911, would constitute an attachment for a pistol brace...?
^ Obviously, a short-barreled rifle, no?
Terry, 230RN
REF:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?posts/12404360/
Pic credit, NSFW: www.reddickmilitaria.com (Contains illustrations of Third Reich materials which, if you even look at them, could taint your political image permanently and screw up your Political score.)
Last edited:
If U bought it from an FFL assembled that way your choices become narrower and this is how I understand it. 1-install a 16'' barrel, 2-register it 3-destroy it per ATF rules. And there are other things linked with the next post...
Lobby (call, write) your state legistors to provide a law and/or ammend your CCW laws to include any XYZ pistol, regardless of current config, purchased before x/x/2022 effective date of the new rule, as a concealable firearm. I do NOT pretend to know if that's a-Ok with Fed rules though.
Not really.
I have posted the link and quoted what the proposed rule change states as far as what to do with a braced pistol once the rule change goes into effect in several threads here. And others have posted them too.
But basically you have several choices:
(1) Permanently remove or alter the “stabilizing brace” such that it cannot be reattached, thus converting the firearm back to its original pistol configuration (as long as it was originally configured without a stock and as a pistol) and thereby removing it from regulation as a “firearm” under the NFA. Exercising this option would mean the pistol would no longer be “equipped with” the stabilizing brace within the meaning of the proposed rule.
(2) Remove the short barrel and attach a 16-inch or longer barrel to the firearm thus removing it from the provisions of the NFA.
(3) Destroy the firearm. ATF will publish information regarding proper destruction on its website, www.atf.gov.
(4) Turn the firearm into your local ATF office.
(5) Complete and submit an Application to Make and Register a Firearm, ATF Form 1 (“Form 1”). As part of the submission, the $200 tax payment is required with the application. Pursuant to 27 CFR 479.102, the name, city, and state of the maker of the firearm must be properly marked on the firearm. All other markings, placed by the original manufacturer, should be adopted. Proof of submission of the Form 1 should be maintained by all possessors. Documentation establishing submission of Form 1 includes, but is not limited to, eForm submission acknowledgement, proof of payment, or copy of Form 1 submission with postmark documentation.
This information comes directly from the proposed rule change as posted on the Federal registry. And as you can see there is no distinction between a lower or pistol purchased with a brace pre installed or a brace added after the pistol was purchased or built.
Again we really do need to wait until the official rule change is actually published to see what it says. And as far as I know that won't be until December 2022.
But basically you have several choices:
(1) Permanently remove or alter the “stabilizing brace” such that it cannot be reattached, thus converting the firearm back to its original pistol configuration (as long as it was originally configured without a stock and as a pistol) and thereby removing it from regulation as a “firearm” under the NFA. Exercising this option would mean the pistol would no longer be “equipped with” the stabilizing brace within the meaning of the proposed rule.
(2) Remove the short barrel and attach a 16-inch or longer barrel to the firearm thus removing it from the provisions of the NFA.
(3) Destroy the firearm. ATF will publish information regarding proper destruction on its website, www.atf.gov.
(4) Turn the firearm into your local ATF office.
(5) Complete and submit an Application to Make and Register a Firearm, ATF Form 1 (“Form 1”). As part of the submission, the $200 tax payment is required with the application. Pursuant to 27 CFR 479.102, the name, city, and state of the maker of the firearm must be properly marked on the firearm. All other markings, placed by the original manufacturer, should be adopted. Proof of submission of the Form 1 should be maintained by all possessors. Documentation establishing submission of Form 1 includes, but is not limited to, eForm submission acknowledgement, proof of payment, or copy of Form 1 submission with postmark documentation.
This information comes directly from the proposed rule change as posted on the Federal registry. And as you can see there is no distinction between a lower or pistol purchased with a brace pre installed or a brace added after the pistol was purchased or built.
Again we really do need to wait until the official rule change is actually published to see what it says. And as far as I know that won't be until December 2022.
CapnMac
Member
At this time, there's probably no way to know.
Which may well be part of the reason why the ATFE wants to "stay" enforcement. How that "stay" became branded as an "amnesty" now being lost to history.
And, there are every sort of rumors flying about in the confusion. One of which is that ATFE is going to allow "no stamp" SBR registration for [insert time period]. Which is the most astounding twisting of all this I've heard so far.
Even ATFE does not now how they are doing this. Note that their own "score sheet" still retains the "ATFE reserves the right to [ignore the results of the score sheet]" language that was in the initial Proposed Rule dump.
Which may well be part of the reason why the ATFE wants to "stay" enforcement. How that "stay" became branded as an "amnesty" now being lost to history.
And, there are every sort of rumors flying about in the confusion. One of which is that ATFE is going to allow "no stamp" SBR registration for [insert time period]. Which is the most astounding twisting of all this I've heard so far.
Even ATFE does not now how they are doing this. Note that their own "score sheet" still retains the "ATFE reserves the right to [ignore the results of the score sheet]" language that was in the initial Proposed Rule dump.
Neo-Luddite
Member
AFAIK, that number is near or at zero; but that was a true amnesty (by the meaning of the term) where individuals were permitted to make lawful items they may have possessed that were utterly unlawful, even knowingly stolen. This is not quite the same situation at all, but I think I'm getting your point--that the "deal" offered then by the fedgov has been honored thus far.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,590
No, what they are calling "amnesty" means waiving the $200 tax.
Demi-human
maybe likes firearms a little bit…
And then ask the .Gov permission every single time you wish to walk 158’ south to Wisconsin with your rifle.
As I can imagine, sometimes they’ll say “no”.
I don’t need to ask if I can cross state lines with a Desert Eagle, why should I have to ask to cross it with a 22LR AR pistol? Or rifle, or whatever the new word is…
How about we stop acting like one color of crayon is more dangerous than another?
They are all crayons.
And honestly, brace be damned!
It’s all the other retarded rules. Banned gripping surfaces, verboten sights. I’ll still fire it how ever pleases me, I can shoulder the receiver extension, but removing other “features”? Why on earth would they want to make a weapon more difficult to use? That makes it more dangerous for everyone.
Does some precocious fool think he’s going to force the whole country to shoot these pistols “Bullseye style”?
I really feel like that is the tack they’re trying to take.
“We got away with those moronic definitions and feature rules in California, time to try the rest of the country…”
Mark_Mark
Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 17,856
I follow all the rules of the Federal government and the supreme leaders.
citizenconn
Member
Is this guy peddling a conspiracy theory or is he correct that the ATF is setting a trap with their so-called
"amnesty?" The video is a bit long, but the gist of it is that under the guise of "amnesty" the ATF is having you send in pics of the pistol(s) in question as well as all of its and your identifying information. They will then use those pics to evaluate against their checklist (remember that?) to see if your firearms qualifies as a braced pistol or is an SBR.
For those who have graded their braced pistols on the sheet, how many actually passed? Plus don't forget the ATF reserves the right to disqualify it based on their own volition. So I'm assuming if they say it doesn't meet the criteria for a braced pistol you will still be on the hook for the $200. Plus now they know exactly what you have and where to come get it if you don't comply.
So what do you think? Trap or sincere effort on their part?
"amnesty?" The video is a bit long, but the gist of it is that under the guise of "amnesty" the ATF is having you send in pics of the pistol(s) in question as well as all of its and your identifying information. They will then use those pics to evaluate against their checklist (remember that?) to see if your firearms qualifies as a braced pistol or is an SBR.
For those who have graded their braced pistols on the sheet, how many actually passed? Plus don't forget the ATF reserves the right to disqualify it based on their own volition. So I'm assuming if they say it doesn't meet the criteria for a braced pistol you will still be on the hook for the $200. Plus now they know exactly what you have and where to come get it if you don't comply.
So what do you think? Trap or sincere effort on their part?
They would not be an AOW with a brace installed. They would be classified as a SBS since the ATF is trying to say that braces are a stock.
Now if you take a Tac14 or Shockwave and replace the bird head grip with a pistol grip then it becomes an AOW. The reason is that it is now under 26" in OAL and considered concealable.
As it is now, these are classified as a "firearm" since they do not meet the definition of a shotgun nor do they meet the definition of an AOW. Here is the kicker though. As soon as you conceal a Tac 14 or Shockwave then it does become an AOW.
Last edited:
FL-NC
Member
I was married to a woman that was unreliable and inconsistent- constantly "changed her mind", which of course often changed the truth. Kind of "all over the road" and demanding, with a big sense of entitlement. Needless to say, there was an absence of trust and confidence, so I removed her from my life, as I try to do with all things negative. Many regulatory agencies lately have given me the same distrustful feelings with the same types of negative behaviors, but without the option of removing them from my life or even putting them in an "ignore" status. Just my "gut feeling". Fortunately I don't own a arm braced AR.
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,134
Might have to get some of those cheap ones, just to get the SBR stamps. Then chunk them in the trash and put a decent stock on when I get the approved form 1…
I've never understood, if the brace is supposedly to be poofed into a stock why can't the owner simply use it on an... AR rifle?
GOOD CITIZEN pays taxes etc owns 2 guns. PistolA and RifleZ.
PistolA has a brace.
On XX/XX/20?? it becomes no go.
On XX/XX/20?? + 1 day, brace gets put on Rifle Z .
Or is that too simple a process without a congressional hearing, set up a committee and spend $2mil to reach same conclusion.
GOOD CITIZEN pays taxes etc owns 2 guns. PistolA and RifleZ.
PistolA has a brace.
On XX/XX/20?? it becomes no go.
On XX/XX/20?? + 1 day, brace gets put on Rifle Z .
Or is that too simple a process without a congressional hearing, set up a committee and spend $2mil to reach same conclusion.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
