BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,505
And for those who assemble their pistol AR’s whether with a brace or just utilizing a buffer tube there is no way for the ATF to know.
ATF New Pistol Brace Rule now dropping in December 2022
- Thread starter citizenconn
- Start date
- Status
And for those who assemble their pistol AR’s whether with a brace or just utilizing a buffer tube there is no way for the ATF to know.
F-111 John
Member
Does the ATF have the legal authority to waive a tax? Wouldn't a tax holiday on SBRs require congressional action?
OP
OP
citizenconn
Member
Those are great questions. That has historically been the problem with with the ATF. Every time you think you understand their stance on something they move the goalposts. But if the do go hardline in December on pistol braces, it sure would be nice if the Republicans in Congress could get enough support to waive fees for a set period or grandfather existing braces/lowers or something similar.
But getting the Republicans to do anything except ask for more money to get re-elected seems a dubious battle at best.
N555
Member
They gave no reason to regulate them.
We shoud have them because reasons.
Otto
Member
- Joined
- May 14, 2007
- Messages
- 2,354
LOL....the stamp is only $200. I spent that much filling my pickup. The original fee for an NFA tax stamp in 1934 was $200....same as today.
But back then, $200 was like $4,300 today adjusted for inflation.
Seriously, if you're remotely considering a tax stamp...I'd get it now before they jack the price.
Think of it as an investment.
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1934?amount=200
highroadmember
Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2022
- Messages
- 5
Yes, I bought a Sig 556 pistol before there was the brace craze. A few years later everything was braced for AR pistols. I was always jealous mine had no brace. I had a SBR with tax stamp previously, but didn't want to spend more, so went for the Sig pistol.
The ATF looks at all the YT vids, they see the braced pistols being shot as SBR's.
OP
OP
citizenconn
Member
That's all well and good if you have one. Not quite so cheap if you have 15, 20 or more.
N555
Member
I have like a dozen. Mostly silencers.
Sistema1927
Member
Here is what I envision, should they want to enforce this in order to make examples of some folks.
ATF makes a visit to a distributor that sold braced pistols online, say PSA. They seize the records and then start checking on some of the buyers. If they possess a braced pistol that doesn't meet the new criteria, and haven't taken the steps to destroy, convert, or pay the tax, then arrest them, prosecute vigorously, and then strip them of their 2A rights once they are convicted as a felon.
Think it can't happen?
OP
OP
citizenconn
Member
Well in that instance you get in the weeds with ex post facto laws. My interpretation is that they could not make a new determination that makes you a felon for previous behavior. But would that apply to future behavior as well? I think that's why the often grandfather things in rather than have to be challenged by that legal hurdle. The ATF seems to drop prosecution in a lot of cases when it comes to the court requiring them to give specifics on their rules. As we know, their rules are often fluid interpretations at best over time.
AlexanderA
Member
AR "pistols" (with or without "braces") are just workarounds for the SBR rules. If you're going to register such a thing, just call it an SBR and put a proper stock on it. The whole idea behind this change is for "braces" to become redundant. Nobody would ever register them.
theotherwaldo
Member
So what gives the Revenuers the right to keep creating criminal law without Congressional input?
Well, nobody is stopping them....
theotherwaldo
Member
Well, the Supreme Court just put the kibosh on the EPA's habit of just pulling new laws out of their nether regions... .
Ignition Override
Member
My gun buddy has a brace- naturally- on his Very short 9mm by Kalash. USA.
Very cool gun.
As for Supreme Court rulings on gun issues, they certainly have no powers to then force bureaucrats to welcome gun owners’ new freedoms with “open arms”.
For example, in the “City of Chicago” didn’t the mayor still make it very difficult for a gun shop(s) to open?
Very cool gun.
As for Supreme Court rulings on gun issues, they certainly have no powers to then force bureaucrats to welcome gun owners’ new freedoms with “open arms”.
For example, in the “City of Chicago” didn’t the mayor still make it very difficult for a gun shop(s) to open?
Last edited:
Buzznrose
Member
Deleted
AlexanderA
Member
The underlying law here (regarding the "pistol brace") is the NFA of 1934. ATF is just cracking down on an obvious loophole / workaround.
Given my druthers, the whole NFA should be declared unconstitutional. But as long as we have it, it shouldn't be flagrantly disregarded.
theotherwaldo
Member
My family has a long history of disregarding the rules laid down by the Revenuers.
One grandfather was a bootlegger whose son ran booze with the Allison Boys.
The other handled the Mafia booze brought into California from Mexico.
I'm probably the most law-abiding member of the family, but I don't see why the Revenuers (now renamed the BATFE) should get away with creating criminal law without any real oversight... .
One grandfather was a bootlegger whose son ran booze with the Allison Boys.
The other handled the Mafia booze brought into California from Mexico.
I'm probably the most law-abiding member of the family, but I don't see why the Revenuers (now renamed the BATFE) should get away with creating criminal law without any real oversight... .
In defense of pistol braces; the ATF did give out letters certifying the current products in the marketplace were allowed. If the BATF does make them illegal it will reverse current policy. It's almost as if the BATF entrapped brace purchasers. They'd never do that, just ask Randy Weaver.....
Sistema1927
Member
It all comes down to this: Who wants to step up to be the test case?
Possibly, after many years and lots of hassle, you are vindicated in the Supreme Court. Possibly, you end up a disenfranchised and disarmed felon. Feel like rolling the dice?
Possibly, after many years and lots of hassle, you are vindicated in the Supreme Court. Possibly, you end up a disenfranchised and disarmed felon. Feel like rolling the dice?
Handshaker
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2018
- Messages
- 309
I've seen a noticeable uptick in AR pistols being for sale on Armslist lately from private and retail sellers.
Is that "brace loophole" similar to the "gun show loophole" the anti-gunners are always referring to? And explain exactly what the "loophole" is. Something is either illegal, or it isn't. And the ATF has provided letters to some brace manufacturers that their devices aren't in violation of any law.
By your logic, driving through a yellow traffic light should be considered a "red light loophole" and drivers given tickets for breaking the law against running red lights.
berettaprofessor
Member
Yes, but what if they say "no?" Or make it so hard to qualify for the $200 SBR that you can't?
That's not how precedent cases proceed. Check how the NY case went, nobody risked jail or 2A rights.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
