They are still legal pistols when no brace is attached and no means to attach a brace present. This is no different than AR pistols with a bare buffer tube.
BATFE - Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached “Stabilizing Braces”
- Thread starter Spats McGee
- Start date
- Status
They are still legal pistols when no brace is attached and no means to attach a brace present. This is no different than AR pistols with a bare buffer tube.
Exactly! So the ATF could have made this whole mess simple
If you have a brace, register it or destroy it! In effect banning braces as who wants a brace if you can register it and have a real stock.
Seems aimed entirely at firearms made from receivers that could be either a rifle or pistol. and exchanging uppers.
A AR pistol is gonna have a buffer tube regardless.
That's your opinion. I'm basing my actions on what my local gun store is doing. I don't see why someone who has changed out a carbine notched buffer tube , for a round smooth pistol buffer tube, could be prosecuted for constructive possession for a stock that doesn't work on a pistol tube. Ignorance is bliss
No such thing as "Constructive intent". ATF doesn't care about your intent." Constructive Possession" has been around ever since they decided to go after people with AR15's and M16 trigger parts, and sten gun parts kits and muffler tubing.
That only matters if you have the notched stock installed on the pistol tube, with a pistol upper. I don't know why someone would do something so goofy, but there are a lot of Bubba's out there.
And I'm not some dumb rube that just fell off the turnup truck. I had an FFL for 6 years, and recieved plenty of "Guidance" letters from ATF and state DOJ. I never got in any trouble, or was investigated because of of an incorrect interpretation of laws or regulations.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
The ATF didn't want to do this because it would open up the registry.
But yes this would have been the simplest reform as far as clarity and understanding goes.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/pro...-mini-pistol-stabilzing-brace-black?a=2210292
SB Tactical's brace for smooth non-adjustable buffer tubes.
There are none available for sale.. and I doubt they will be coming available again, at least until court action changes things. Any bumpstocks for sale? Even though they are "legal" again?
lsudave
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,042
So for example- a pistol lower, purchased "complete" with a carbine buffer tube and a MFT blade mounted to said tube... remove the blade only, and it's ok? That's going with the following:
Also- a stripped pistol lower, with a KAK (I believe) tube, which is round but has the nocks to affix a Shockwave blade; again, remove the blade, and it's OK?
Curious about that, as one might have purchased some completely smooth pistol tubes, round and no indents or holes present, to swap out. Would swapping the tubes be necessary, or is that now perceived as "just additional adjustments".
Another question, after watching Sootch's interpretation of the ATF presentation- the foam that slips over the smooth pistol tube at the end: is that a no-go too? He seemed to state it would be considered "a shoulderable accessory".
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
That's not the point I was making. The point is that there are pistol braces that were already sold and owned by individuals that can be installed on smooth pistol buffer tubes. Which could cause a problem with someone who owns one of those braces and thinks they are ok with having a smooth buffer tube along with that brace in close proximity to one another; this is what the ATF calls "constructive intent."
I will go with the Yankee Marshall's advice. Don't make a lot of noise and draw attention to yourself. Matt of crs firearms did that, and got himself arrested. Not too smart to post on YouTube your intentions to possess "Card keys" ( drop in auto sears for AR15's) or distribute them, based on some novel new legal theory, that hasn't already been hashed out in the last fifty years.
Probably the easiest fixes to the brace issue is either destroy the brace, register your firearm as an SBR, or attach a braced lower to a rifle length upper.
I try to avoid messy legal entanglements when it comes to firearm regulations. If you don't push the boundaries with law enforcement, then you will avoid trouble. Live by the K.I.S.S. principle. Live long and prosper.
Probably the easiest fixes to the brace issue is either destroy the brace, register your firearm as an SBR, or attach a braced lower to a rifle length upper.
I try to avoid messy legal entanglements when it comes to firearm regulations. If you don't push the boundaries with law enforcement, then you will avoid trouble. Live by the K.I.S.S. principle. Live long and prosper.
P Flados
Member
For a guy with one AR that started out as a braced pistol, pulling and tossing the brace is OK per the rule. It does not matter if there are notches or setscrew indents on the buffer tube. Putting a smooth buffer tube on that pistol does not make it any "more legal".
The "Constructive Possession" is all about having parts around (anywhere on a given piece of property or anywhere in your home as I understand it) that can only be used in a wrong configuration.
Going forward, the function of most AR buffer tube and brace assemblies is really no different than most AR rifle buffer tube and stocks assemblies.
For most folks with more than a couple of ARs, the key to a "problem combination" is probably more the pistol length barrels. If you have no pistol length barrels, you are at zero risk. If you do have pistol barrels, but have plenty of AR stuff, just make sure that:
A situation I feel is much less common can also be considered. Lets say someone has one or more ARs and only pistol length barrels at a given location. For this case, having either a brace or an AR rifle buttstock at this location meets the ATF description of "Constructive Possession" for an illegal SBR.
The "Constructive Possession" is all about having parts around (anywhere on a given piece of property or anywhere in your home as I understand it) that can only be used in a wrong configuration.
Going forward, the function of most AR buffer tube and brace assemblies is really no different than most AR rifle buffer tube and stocks assemblies.
For most folks with more than a couple of ARs, the key to a "problem combination" is probably more the pistol length barrels. If you have no pistol length barrels, you are at zero risk. If you do have pistol barrels, but have plenty of AR stuff, just make sure that:
1. You do not assemble a wrong combination.
2. You do not get rid of stuff in sequence that leaves you with only a wrong combination of parts.
2. You do not get rid of stuff in sequence that leaves you with only a wrong combination of parts.
A situation I feel is much less common can also be considered. Lets say someone has one or more ARs and only pistol length barrels at a given location. For this case, having either a brace or an AR rifle buttstock at this location meets the ATF description of "Constructive Possession" for an illegal SBR.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
Not if that person has a pistol AR by their definition or an SBR'd lower. They have the means to utilize those short pistol uppers in a legal fashion.
The person could have 1000 short barreled uppers and one approved pistol lower and have the means of using all those 1000 uppers in a lawful way.
Depends on their definition of "Pistol AR". ATF no longer recognizes a complete braced lower with a pistol upper as a Pistol. Their current definition of that combination would be an SBR. Subject to NFA regulations.
dogtown tom
Member
Huh?
The ATF adds firearms to the NFA Registry literally 24 hours a day.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
I thought that there would be repercussions if they desired to add additional items to be regulated that are not already under the NFA. Meaning if the ATF wanted to add pistol braces as a registerable item it would open up the NFA to scrutiny. Maybe I misunderstood what I previously had read.
Feel free to correct my misunderstanding.
I'm not entirely sure that is true. But I do admit that I have not been through an NFA registration process. My understanding is that part of that application requires sending photos, and written documentation describing the firearm. I don't know for a fact that for instance, you can change your pistol upper to a different barrel length, or caliber, without sending documentation to ATF, about your modification. Maybe someone here with NFA registration experience of an SBR can chime in?
The ATF is not regulating a brace by itself with the new ruling. There are regulating how the brace is used. The ATF has stated this several times.
So if you have a brace and only have AR pistols then that can be considered "constructive possession". If you also have an AR rifle that you can use the brace on then there is no constructive possession. This is no different than having multiple uppers. As long as you have a legal use for them then there is no constructive possession. You can have as many short barrels uppers as you want as long as you have at least one pistol or SBR lower to install them on.
If you have short barreled uppers and only have a rifle lower then you can be found in constructive possession. This can and will get you into legal trouble. The same goes if you only have pistols and brace in your possession.
So if you have a brace and only have AR pistols then that can be considered "constructive possession". If you also have an AR rifle that you can use the brace on then there is no constructive possession. This is no different than having multiple uppers. As long as you have a legal use for them then there is no constructive possession. You can have as many short barrels uppers as you want as long as you have at least one pistol or SBR lower to install them on.
If you have short barreled uppers and only have a rifle lower then you can be found in constructive possession. This can and will get you into legal trouble. The same goes if you only have pistols and brace in your possession.
dogtown tom
Member
ATF isn't adding categories to the NFA.
dogtown tom
Member
ATF loves it when you send them notification that a firearm configuration has changed, but its not required by any federal law or ATF regulation.
Probably would not be an issue until you try to sell your SBR.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
I know this, the person I was responding to was suggesting that the ATF should’ve just required braces to be registered, to avoid all this that is going on. That is why I went down that train of thought as to why the ATF didn’t choose that course of action.
- Status
