dogtown tom
Member
You might want to do some reading, because everything in this post is wrong.
BATFE - Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached “Stabilizing Braces”
- Thread starter Spats McGee
- Start date
- Status
F-111 John
Member
As far as the ATF is concerned, any and all short barreled firearms that were delivered with braces are and always have been RIFLES. I simply quoted the actual rule, so if you have an issue with it take it up with the ATF.
dogtown tom
Member
Again, that's factually incorrect.
Fact is, ATF didn't consider them as "rifles" because ATF determined they were not rifles FOR TEN YEARS.
If ATF has always considered such firearms as rifles, there would be no need to issue this rule that redefines "rifle".
No, you included quite a bit of opinion that's not based on facts.
.
F-111 John
Member
But the ATF didn't redefine "rifle," they "clarified."If ATF has always considered such firearms as rifles, there would be no need to issue this rule that redefines "rifle".
This final rule’s amended definition of “rifle” clarifies that the term “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a “stabilizing brace”) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided that other factors, as listed in the rule, indicate that the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. (Page 269 of the final rule.)
So I think they are serious about how they see the status of these firearms. If it was delivered with a brace, it is a rifle, but you have 120 days to remove the brace if desired to make a pistol, and the ATF won't require registration of the resulting firearm as a "weapon made from a rifle."
Just because you as an FFL transferred the firearm as a pistol with a brace, in good faith, doesn't mean that the ATF agrees that you properly transferred the firearm, or that the manufacturer properly manufactured the firearm.
But I suppose those were cans of worms that the ATF didn't want to open...
Last edited:
lsudave
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,042
So, seeking clarification on these issues, can someone give a definitive yes/no:
- AR format, 11.5" barreled upper. Brace is on the lower. Simple removal of the brace, leaving the buffer tube in place (a tube with notches to aide brace securement)... remains a pistol. Yes/No?
- Person ALSO owns AR rifles (barrels equal or greater than 16"). Braces removed from pistol(s), can be kept as 'spare stocks' for the rifles, and this does not affect the pistol status. Yes/No?
- Pistol may be handled/fired by any individual who can own/handle a firearm, but a SBR is ONLY the registered owner (no sibling, no child, etc). Yes/No?
- Are we allowed to pursue multiple, simultaneous paths with a firearm, or is it one path? Meaning, can I file to register a SBR, and in the meantime pull the brace, and it's treated as a pistol? Or does the filing itself place it into the SBR grouping, and if for whatever reason the application is denied, is it a SBR going forward?
- During the application, if it goes to a range, can another person handle it? Only without brace, if yes?
Not even the ATF can answer those questions!
SC45-70
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,631
#3 part 2 was clarified by ATF, if the owner is co-located with the person shooting, it's OK. IOW you can take your friend to the range and your friend can shoot it while you are right there.
dogtown tom
Member
Skylerbone
Member
So my final question, asked for clarity, is it I purchased both of my (now) braced pistols as “other” on the 4473s and assembled them into pistols, will removing the braces keep them legal after forbearance?
dogtown tom
Member
lsudave
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,042
With the lawsuits filed, has any stay (pause in the 120 day deadline) been granted? Maybe my google-skills are lacking, but I can't find any hard news, just complaints and some misinformation online. People I had respected as thorough and good info sources, for example, some have neglected to mention the tax waiver on the SBR option. They state that if you want to pursue that route, it will cost you $200. I hate that I can't find a good, trusted source, that posts things objectively on this.
And this is not an Opinion?
F-111 John
Member
As of this moment, no stays have been issued yet for any of the lawsuits filed.
dogtown tom
Member
While I wouldn't ever use "trust" when referring to the ATF, they are THE source for information.
Start here:https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/factoring-criteria-firearms-attached-stabilizing-braces
P Flados
Member
For the response from Dogtown Tom:
Are we allowed to pursue multiple, simultaneous paths with a firearm, or is it one path? Meaning, can I file to register a SBR, and in the meantime pull the brace, and it's treated as a pistol? No. If the configuration changes during the application process you must amend your Form 1 and with eForms that means resubmitting and the wait starts all over. Or does the filing itself place it into the SBR grouping, and if for whatever reason the application is denied, is it a SBR going forward? This is why its important to submit ASAP. If the eForm 1 is denied during the forbearance period you can still comply with the Rule by removing the arm brace.
I am 100% in agreement with most of your responses.
However, I think there is a little more needed for this one. Once the Form 1 is filed, the ATF says you they are ok with you keeping the gun as is until the stamp is approved. I agree that as long as you keep a pistol upper on it, you need to keep the configuration consistent with the submittal (including length) until you get an approval. However, during this time interval, the "simultaneous path" of installing a rifle upper does not seem to violate anything as far as I can see.
Are we allowed to pursue multiple, simultaneous paths with a firearm, or is it one path? Meaning, can I file to register a SBR, and in the meantime pull the brace, and it's treated as a pistol? No. If the configuration changes during the application process you must amend your Form 1 and with eForms that means resubmitting and the wait starts all over. Or does the filing itself place it into the SBR grouping, and if for whatever reason the application is denied, is it a SBR going forward? This is why its important to submit ASAP. If the eForm 1 is denied during the forbearance period you can still comply with the Rule by removing the arm brace.
I am 100% in agreement with most of your responses.
However, I think there is a little more needed for this one. Once the Form 1 is filed, the ATF says you they are ok with you keeping the gun as is until the stamp is approved. I agree that as long as you keep a pistol upper on it, you need to keep the configuration consistent with the submittal (including length) until you get an approval. However, during this time interval, the "simultaneous path" of installing a rifle upper does not seem to violate anything as far as I can see.
Last edited:
P Flados
Member
Removing the braces will make those two guns legal pistols.
If you keep the braces, you need a legal rifle platform to put them on. If at any time the braces are laying around along with pistol uppers but there is no rifle upper nearby, you are at risk with "Constructive Possession".
If you then dispose of the braces, you are done and good with no questions.
I plan to shoot my 300 BO as a bare buffer tube pistol soon to see if I am ok with it.
Even if I am ok with the "bare buffer tube" configuration, I do not like the risk of a future Constructive Possession issue. As long as I am in possession of a pistol length barrel and any lower, I need to keep a lower that can be used to legally assemble a pistol. If I were to become feeble minded (I am only "over the hill" now, but who can predict tomorrow) and give away and/or sell off all of my functional AR pistol stuff but keep an AR rifle, that junk AR pistol barrel hidden in a spare parts bin could theoretically cause me a problem.
Last edited:
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,631
GOA and the state of Texas have filed suit:
Put a pistol buffer tube on ( No stock notches ) and then having the brace won't matter.
The information in #41 is accurate. The information above is not. The ATF warns of constructive possession, and intent is not an element under such conditions. Opportunity is. Do as you wish, but please don't post information that someone else might rely on to their detriment.
F-111 John
Member
I'm not trying to be a smart@ss, I'm genuinely trying to learn.
If I have a brace that is designed to fit an adjustable carbine stock sitting in a spare parts box, and I have an AR pistol with a smooth buffer tube that cannot accept the brace, but I do have several AR rifles that will accept the brace, is that constructive possession?
If I have an AR pistol with a smooth buffer tube, but no brace anywhere in my possession, and I also have an AR rifle, and all I need to do is to pop two pins on each weapon and swap uppers to create an SBR, is that constructive possession?
Last edited:
I never said any of this made sense to me, and I expect it to continually change as circumstances change. Early reads indicated that only a bare pistol tube would qualify, but in the powerpoint presentation the agent said they would not concern themselves with type of tube. That indicates change not only in rules but enforcement decisions which are largely undocumented.
The point was made earlier that if you have rifles also, the brace designed to fit adjustable carbine [tubes] could be used on the rifles, so would not be a basis for a claim of constructive possession. If you have no long guns (16+ barrel), you would have what ATF considers a stock in possession with only a pistol on which to mount it. In my experience, stocks do generally fit onto pistol tubes, but since the erstwhile brace would not fit on yours, there would be no basis for constructive possession. Unless they somehow managed to make it fit anyway.
In the second hypothetical, I believe you are protected by the court's opinion in the Thompson Center case.
The point was made earlier that if you have rifles also, the brace designed to fit adjustable carbine [tubes] could be used on the rifles, so would not be a basis for a claim of constructive possession. If you have no long guns (16+ barrel), you would have what ATF considers a stock in possession with only a pistol on which to mount it. In my experience, stocks do generally fit onto pistol tubes, but since the erstwhile brace would not fit on yours, there would be no basis for constructive possession. Unless they somehow managed to make it fit anyway.
In the second hypothetical, I believe you are protected by the court's opinion in the Thompson Center case.
some braces fit those. though.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
Yup. Just find a place to stash one's braces to prevent "constructive intent," for the likely event that this whole fiasco gets struck down, otherwise destroying the braces will end up just like the folks in the 5th circuit who destroyed their bumpstocks and is now legal for them to own and use within the 5th circuit.
F-111 John
Member
Deleted.
- Status
