Pistol Brace Amnesty

Status
Not open for further replies.
citizenconn said:
That is the big question. If they do grant the amnesty, waive the $200 fee, and approve the form 1 on the braced pistol, will it only be good with that brace and not with a regular stock? Otherwise why are they asking for the pictures when they could just confirm the firearm with the serial number? I don't think anyone knows at this point.

There is speculation that they will use the pictures to grade the braced pistols against their worksheet and if it doesn't pass they will say it doesn't meet the requirements of the amnesty and either require one to destroy it, pay the $200 tax stamp, or in the most extreme possibility, prosecute one with possessing an unregistered SBR.
Click to expand...
Another option would be put a 16" upper on it, right?
 
Balrog said:
Is there any legal consideration that is not resolved by putting a 16" barrel upper on the gun ? It just becomes a rifle at that point, and you can put whatever stock you want on it, right?
Click to expand...

Here are your options on what to do with a braced pistol if/when the rule change goes into effect.

https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-12176/p-87

(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
Click to expand...

This information has been posted several times on The High Road in multiple threads.

As far as the amnesty thing goes. For now all we know is that the ATF has asked for funding. I don't think anyone has seen where this is a 100% sure thing that is going to happen.

We need to wait for the rule change and amnesty to be released before we know exactly what is going on.
 
SharpDog said: ↑
the ramifications of the BATF pistol brace amnesty period, I am wondering what to do if I (potentially) have a braced AR pistol:

''If U bought it from an FFL assembled that way (ed: that is, with a brace attached) 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...''

12Bravo20 said:
...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.
Click to expand...

That (* ^)would seem to be not true as per the ATF document provided here (below)....

12Bravo20 said:
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-12176/p-87

(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...
Click to expand...

And also as published verbatim in a Senatorial letter attachment...
https://www.kennedy.senate.gov/publ...to-ag-and-acting-dirctor-of-atf-6.24.2021.pdf ,

specifically, pg2 para #4;

''...and later added
one, ATF will permit them to destroy their pistol braces (but not if the gun owners purchased the firearms
already equipped with braces). Or they can...''

IF, the letter refers to a brace is in fact a stock, which IS the ATFs position for101 of 100 people who own them. In any event, the Senators of which are all attorneys didn't pull their portion of letter out of thin air.

So it does seem that a braced AR pistol purchased manufactured as so e.g. through an FFL , that particular owner cannot simply remove the brace, destroy it and be in compliance.

FORTUNATELY, this will all be hashed out in court soon !
 
Last edited:
jmorris said:
I could do that, I’ve done more work than changing a tube out on an AR, for $200.

The rest shouldn’t be any different than when I SBR a rifle, as far as the Form 1/requirements. They would just be saving you the fee or are they wanting everyone to pony up the $200 too?
Click to expand...

I’m bring back the late 90’s $15 people!!! Good Enough too

6C8BD5BB-4EE0-4471-9A2E-E77DFC8E7127.jpeg
 
12Bravo20 said:
The firearm in the photo above was over 26" with the 10.5" barrel AND using an extended Kak Sig Super Brace (in photo).

Now if you read the prerequisites in Section 1 of the Worksheet 4999, it states the following:



https://www.atf.gov/file/154866/download

So as you can see anything over 26" in OAL with a brace is not considered a pistol according to the worksheet. If the pistol is over 26" OAL then you can NOT continue with the worksheet per instructions.

That being said, Yes you can have a VFG if and only if the firearm is over 26" in OAL and barrel under 16" in OAL without it being an AOW. But with it will be considered a SBR if it has a brace attached.
Click to expand...
If OAL includes the brace, then with a collapsible brace at maximum extension wouldn't the firearm be over 26" in OAL even with a very short barrel?
 
old lady new shooter said:
If OAL includes the brace, then with a collapsible brace at maximum extension wouldn't the firearm be over 26" in OAL even with a very short barrel?
Click to expand...


If you read the entire worksheet and the proposed rule change along with older letters, an AR pistol is measured from the end of the buffer tube to the end of the muzzle ( unless muzzle device is permanently attached)

The ATF has already determined that folders are measured in the folded position when attached to pistols with braces. They went after people with AR’s (both with and without braces) that were over 26” OAL with a folder AND a VFG. The ATF determined that with the folder folded those were now under 26” and were unregistered AOW’s
 
12Bravo20 said:
If you read the entire worksheet and the proposed rule change along with older letters, an AR pistol is measured from the end of the buffer tube to the end of the muzzle ( unless muzzle device is permanently attached)

The ATF has already determined that folders are measured in the folded position when attached to pistols with braces. They went after people with AR’s (both with and without braces) that were over 26” OAL with a folder AND a VFG. The ATF determined that with the folder folded those were now under 26” and were unregistered AOW’s
Click to expand...
Not folders, a normal adjustable brace like the SBA3. But measuring till the end of the buffer tube sounds like the brace would not be considered part of the OAL, is that correct?
 
old lady new shooter said:
Not folders, a normal adjustable brace like the SBA3. But measuring till the end of the buffer tube sounds like the brace would not be considered part of the OAL, is that correct?
Click to expand...

Correct, a brace is not included in the OAL

In section 1 of the Worksheet 4999 under explanations

* Length measured with all non-operational accessories removed
Click to expand...

And from the top of the 4999

*As used in this worksheet, the term “accessory” is intended as a general term to describe the marketing of items commonly known as “stabilizing braces” and does not affect any ATF determinations whether such items when attached to a handgun are, in fact, “accessories” not necessary for the operation of the handgun, but which enhance its usefulness

or effectiveness, or whether they are component parts necessary to properly operate a weapon, such as a rifle
Click to expand...
 
I can't help thinking that by now, the entire agency is an infringement in and of itself. However, we do have to operate under the law and the attendant "regulations" authorized by statute.

12Bravo20, I appreciate your efforts, expertise, and attempts to tie it all together into a logical whole, but at root, it all boils down to the single word "infringed." This was added to the Constitution in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of the government's powers.

This agency, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, is an abuse.

Terry
 
Last edited:
230RN said:
12Bravo20, I appreciate your efforts, expertise, and attempts to tie it all together into a logical whole, but at root, it all boils down to the single word "infringed." This was added to the Constitution in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of the government's powers.
Click to expand...

Thank you and yes I agree that this is infringement.

As usual, the ATF has made things clear a mud yet again. And you can do everything possible to meet the rule changes and they can still say you have an unregistered SBR if they feel like it.
 
12Bravo20 said:
As usual, the ATF has made things clear a mud yet again. And you can do everything possible to meet the rule changes and they can still say you have an unregistered SBR if they feel like it.
Click to expand...
This is the part that gives me heartburn. If I had a braced AR pistol, there's absolutely no way I'd send pics to the BATFE, knowing that they could simply decide, "Nope. You have an unregistered SBR. Thanks for the evidence."

12Bravo20, I want to echo 230RN's sentiment. You've obviously spent quite a bit of time and energy sorting this thing out, and you've done us all a great service in that. Thank you.
 
Thank you @Spats McGee


Another thing that bothers me about the worksheet is when they take about different sights not being usable at arms length. I especially disagree with them saying that the standard AR/M16 iron sights are not usable. I have no problems using A2 sights at arms length on my 9mm Colt SMG clone. And I wear bifocals too.
 
12Bravo20 said:
Another thing that bothers me about the worksheet is when they take about different sights not being usable at arms length. I especially disagree with them saying that the standard AR/M16 iron sights are not usable.
...

.
Click to expand...

Straw-grasping. My crystal ball shows a guy at one of their staff meetings exclaiming that those sights are unusable at arm's length and everyone chiming in with "Right on, JB!" "Good going !" "Excellent point, JB !"
 
Last edited:
230RN said:
How can they "waive" a fee which was established legislatively?
Click to expand...

NFA'34 includes the authority to declare an amnesty. That's how they will do it. ATF will take the position that arm braces were incorrectly approved, and that any firearm so fitted must either be stripped of the brace or registered as an SBR. To evade some of the inevitable lawsuits, they would use the amnesty power to allow no-cost SBR registration.
 
I'll be shocked if this isn't a trap.
I think what they are going to do is take their little form 4999 or what ever they call it, use the pictures and descriptions on the new amnesty form1 to say something to the effect of "you never had a braced pistol, you illegally built/bought an SBR, pay $200 or surrender it or else" for a large portion of amnesty applications. Once you send them all the information I have a feeling they're not just going to let you put a 16 barrel on it turning it into a rifle or replace the brace setup with a slick tube and forget the whole ordeal. Maybe I'm wrong, I hope I'm wrong, but I got a bad feeling. If I'm wrong this is a great way to get a free gateway NFA item.

Either way I think this is a great way to get millions of people who never heard of the NFA to start demanding it's abloshment.

If they just want to cut a whole lot of tax stamps to people screaming "shut up and take my money" all they would have to do is reinterpret the Hughes ammendment to say something else.
 
They ask for a photograph of the firearm.
Since the LOWER on an AR type gun is the firearm.
What happens if you send them a photograph of the braced lower with out the upper?

Again asking for a friend
SC45-70
 
SC45-70 said:
They ask for a photograph of the firearm.
Since the LOWER on an AR type gun is the firearm.
What happens if you send them a photograph of the braced lower with out the upper?

Again asking for a friend
SC45-70
Click to expand...
Bro, don’t play around with the AFT… they not your joking buddies, they hate gun owners and are obedient to the supreme leader
 
Last edited:
Still wondering whether even with waiving the $200 there will still be a long period during which the owner is not allowed to use the firearm as with a normal NFA application.
 
old lady new shooter said:
Still wondering whether even with waiving the $200 there will still be a long period during which the owner is not allowed to use the firearm as with a normal NFA application.
Click to expand...

I'd say ask that one during the amnesty period.
Speaking of amnesty, I'd say be more concerned of THIS admin's super-quickness to, ''redefine'' what is a known item to...what is convenient/ politically expedient for & at the moment.
So, amnesty does exist within the law or rules, but, voila, we CHANGED the meaning to XYZ, and, you're in violations. Again.

FACT BASED SOURCE: that's what this whole thing is about! They originally said ''its Ok we examined it etc.'' then again & again, now yelln FUNZIES
 
citizenconn said:
That is the big question. If they do grant the amnesty, waive the $200 fee, and approve the form 1 on the braced pistol, will it only be good with that brace and not with a regular stock?
Click to expand...

I would think if they say, “well, a brace is not a stock.”, would that not blow away their entire argument for putting them into the NFA branch?
 
Unless they change a law once it's an SBR it's an SBR, throw a real stock on that bad boy. If I remember correctly you just have to be able to return it to "as registered configuration", for example I registered my first NFA item back in 2007, a sawed off shotgun with a pistol grip. Well the pistol grip is useless so I put the full wood stock on there, much better. I didn't know I could put a range of OAL measurements on the form1 back then. Now I have to keep the pistol grip forever.
Are they really going to make braced AR pistols their own extra special type of SBR where you can only put a pistol brace on them? Yes oh yes please do it.
There's really no way this ends well for the NFA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

blackd24
  • Locked
Pistol braces
2 3
Replies
67
Views
3K
crestoncowboy
C
Pat Riot
  • Locked
ATF Rule on Braces Published Jan 31, 2023
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
125
Views
5K
rust collector
R
Good Ol' Boy
  • Locked
Those Of You That Carry A Gun In Your Vehicle...
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Fiv3r
F
General Geoff
  • Locked
Wanna stimulate the economy? Ask for a new machine gun amnesty.
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
ctdonath
C
Jeff H
  • Locked
Specific question about the brace injunction
Replies
7
Views
474
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
Back
Top