Poll: Which option do you think owners of braced pistols will choose?

Which option do you think owners of braced pistols will choose?

  • Remove the brace

    Votes: 25 32.9%

  • Change out the barrel for a 16" one

    Votes: 8 10.5%

  • Fill out the ATF form and worksheet and send the photos

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Never mind the "amnesty", declare it an SBR, file the form and pay the $200

    Votes: 2 2.6%

  • Ignore the new rules

    Votes: 40 52.6%
  • Total voters
    76
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

old lady new shooter

Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2015
Messages
30,562
We kind of know what the options are, barring a winning lawsuit banning ATF from carrying out their plan before its supposed effective date. I'm curious to know what folks here think most owners will choose to do.

Would also be interesting to see people's rationales for each choice, if you care to share them. :)
 
I would likely remove the brace. The gun is a pistol, and if I decide to make it an SBR I would certainly go for a real stock rather than an arm brace.
 
Has the ATF made a "decision" yet??

When the firearm was purchased it was a pistol
When the brace was purchased it was legal and even had the offical letter from the ATF

The firearm is still a pistol

Is there a rule change on the angled fore arm grips? Are they going to be forgiven??

So tired of all this nonsense. Just like the AK BS and muzzle devices, hand guards, x number of US parts etc etc/
 
Last edited:
I'll probably just pull the brace off my 10.5" and it will be a stupid pistol and for my 11.5 I'll just try to find an XM177 style flash hider that's 4.5" long and pin/weld it on there. That's about the best option for me I think. It's all so dumb. I'll see about maybe trying to find aluminum because the whole point of the braced pistol was to give my small wife a more weildy AR to be as light as possible
 
Will all depend on what happens. I don’t think a magic 8 ball can tell us yet..

I have I gun that will fall under the rule. If I can get a free stamp and put a real stock on it. I am game

if not I will remove the brace.
 
N555 said:
A large portion people will effectively ignore it because they never heard of the NFA.
Click to expand...
Well, those of us old enough to remember those revered NFA greats like George Blanda, Billy Cannon and Don Maynard....wait that was the AFL, not the NFA. Dang acronyms.

Has the NFA had any greats of note? Maybe this recent article from the NRAs Institute of Legislative Action will shed some light on that. Here is the last paragraph of the article for those who aren't interested in clicking the link and reading the entire article:

"If ATF truly wants to burnish its image, the agency might try ditching this ham-fisted public relations campaign and going after those who misuse firearms to commit violent crime rather than concocting new administrative gun controls and targeting well-meaning gun owners and FFLs over technical violations."

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20220801/busting-atfs-myth-busting
 
Last edited:
berettaprofessor said:
I can't pick just one....because I'll do different things with the several I own.
Click to expand...
I think the question was about owners in general, not the individuals here specifically, at least that's how I understood it. I don't own any of the "pistols" in question, so it doesn't directly effect me. I just answered what I figured most would do.
 
My son got me into braced 300 BO ARs. All of our stuff, we assembled ourselves. One of them I re-configured to match the proposed rules, but did not like the result. I did get one 16" barrel. Bare buffer tube or the slip on foam sleeve might be used.

I am worry that they might "stand firm" and declare that the lower for any gun with a non compliant configuration was defacto a rifle needing a stamp and that removing the brace is not a legal resolution. If so, I can "fix" my situation by getting new lowers for anything we want to assemble into a pistol configuration. For guns other than ARs, such a solution may not be practical at all.

If the rule does get issued I really hope it will have better guidance and options for existing owners. Declaring "amnesty" to the extent that any gun sold as a pistol can be "reconfigured" into an acceptable pistol would be a start.
 
P Flados said:
My son got me into braced 300 BO ARs. All of our stuff, we assembled ourselves. One of them I re-configured to match the proposed rules, but did not like the result. I did get one 16" barrel. Bare buffer tube or the slip on foam sleeve might be used.

I am worry that they might "stand firm" and declare that the lower for any gun with a non compliant configuration was defacto a rifle needing a stamp and that removing the brace is not a legal resolution. If so, I can "fix" my situation by getting new lowers for anything we want to assemble into a pistol configuration. For guns other than ARs, such a solution may not be practical at all.

If the rule does get issued I really hope it will have better guidance and options for existing owners. Declaring "amnesty" to the extent that any gun sold as a pistol can be "reconfigured" into an acceptable pistol would be a start.
Click to expand...
The original convoluted documentation did say that removing the brace would be acceptable.
 
So is a non contoured buffer tube required or can I just pull the brace off my existing standard tube and be compliant? The more I ask the more irritated I get. People qho bought these things prior to all this should be left the hell alone, that's the least they could do.... make millions of people go backwards, smh
 
Rule3 said:
Has the ATF made a "decision" yet??
Click to expand...

Rule3 said:
Are they going to be forgiven??
Click to expand...

Rule3 said:
So tired of all this nonsense
Click to expand...

DustyGmt said:
It's all so dumb
Click to expand...

captain awesome said:
It's all ridiculous
Click to expand...

captain awesome said:
put up with this BS
Click to expand...

N555 said:
never heard of the NFA.
Click to expand...

citizenconn said:
ham-fisted public relations campaign
Click to expand...

old lady new shooter said:
convoluted documentation
Click to expand...
View attachment 1103986
bill.jpg
 
Personally I don't think this will be like the "machine gun" deal of way back....but I think people back then did not trust .gov like they do now.
 
DustyGmt said:
So is a non contoured buffer tube required or can I just pull the brace off my existing standard tube and be compliant? The more I ask the more irritated I get. People qho bought these things prior to all this should be left the hell alone, that's the least they could do.... make millions of people go backwards, smh
Click to expand...
Probably. It looks like they are going to allow pistol owners to throw 16+ barrel on there and make it a rifle.
It's looks like there's no going back to the 1990s and early 2000s slick tube.
It sounds like they are trying to say every AR pistol ever, sold with or without a brace is an SBR. Plus about 30 million other non AR platform pistols.
Oh and the ATF has a searchable gun transaction data base with over 900 million transaction records. So they will find people who have them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
  • Poll
Why are you a gun owner?
2 3
Replies
74
Views
2K
Floppy_D
F
Skribs
  • Locked
  • Poll
Which do you have more of?
2 3
Replies
57
Views
3K
Iramo94
I
DustyGmt
  • Locked
What will you do with your braced pistol if things get weird
Replies
3
Views
393
GEM
G
Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
Do you feel products like this can cast a negative or violent image of gun owners?
2 3 4 5
Replies
123
Views
8K
USAF_Vet
U
M
  • Locked
  • Poll
"Do you give notice to homeowners before you concealed carry in their home?"
2 3 4 5
Replies
112
Views
4K
gym
G
Back
Top