BATFE - Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached “Stabilizing Braces”

Status
Not open for further replies.
lsudave said:
I'm sure we're going to have a flurry of lawsuits. I'm not a lawyer, I can't interpret which ones will be more effective than the others.

The main thing I personally need to follow- we need to know if there's a stay or pause in the 120 deadline, including the SBR free registration.

I likely will file to get several registered... one of my main concerns was how to pass the ones registered to me, down to my son (I'm mid 50's, and I do have one eye towards "after me" regarding everything I own). As I understand it, if I specify that he receives them in a will, it's a no-cost transfer to him. He would also be registering several, my concern was that he ends up with them all some day. Along with the rest of my stuff.

I suppose the "wise" move, if there are any, would be to keep (at least) one pistol, and register (at least) one SBR per person, if they have multiple. In an AR format, this gives you options both ways.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the window to add braced pistols to a trust is over. A trust is still an option though. You can setup a trust with you and your son on it which will take care of the need for a tax free Form 5 upon your son inheriting NFA items. But you would have to first register any braced pistols as SBRs as an individual and then transfer them to your trust along with paying the $200 tax per item.

As far as the lawsuits go, we will just have to wait for now. Hopefully we get wins in all of the cases.
 
For anyone who is interested, Washington Gun Law now published a video on the FRAC lawsuit. He brings more details than the G&G analysis. One such new point is that the case specifically calls out the ATF for its supplementary document featuring photographs of brace-equipped firearms which the new rule classifies as SBRs, with no explanation of why each one is now allegedly an SBR, but nowhere provides a list or photos of brace-equipped firearms which it will NOT consider SBRs.
 
Last edited:
old lady new shooter said:
... One such new point is that the case specifically calls out the ATF for its supplementary document featuring photographs of brace-equipped firearms which the new rule classifies as SBRs, with no explanation of why each one is now allegedly an SBR, but nowhere provides a list or photos of brace-equipped firearms which it will NOT consider SBRs.
Click to expand...
I don't see this going anywhere. If you read the ATF pdf, the photos all have captions describing what the item is and are on pages with detailed explanations of the specific issue in question (ie the photo is an example of what is being discussed in the section where it is posted).

Most regulations are written from one of two viewpoints -- either everything is okay with specific actions not allowed, or everything is forbidden with certain exceptions granted an okay. In this case it looks like the premise is rifles and pistols are fine except when these criteria are met which put it into a prohibited category. The document is giving the prohibition descriptions so asking for a list of non-prohibitions seems like a non starter.
 
illinoisburt said:
I don't see this going anywhere. If you read the ATF pdf, the photos all have captions describing what the item is and are on pages with detailed explanations of the specific issue in question (ie the photo is an example of what is being discussed in the section where it is posted).

Most regulations are written from one of two viewpoints -- either everything is okay with specific actions not allowed, or everything is forbidden with certain exceptions granted an okay. In this case it looks like the premise is rifles and pistols are fine except when these criteria are met which put it into a prohibited category. The document is giving the prohibition descriptions so asking for a list of non-prohibitions seems like a non starter.
Click to expand...
This is the document with the photos. The only text accompanying each photo is the name of the firearm and the brace.
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regul...acefinalruleguidance-commerciallypdf/download
 
old lady new shooter said:
I did not read all 293 pages of the main document. Can you tell us whether it has photos or a list of current braced pistols that will NOT be considered SBR's under the new rule?
Click to expand...

The publication does not provide specific examples of factory models braced firearms which are truly pistols. They describe what constitutes an SBR and give examples of popular factory models which fall into this category. From their perspective, it appears they have determined most braced firearms are an SBR. However if you are unsure how an item you own may be classified then you can submit it to them for review.

From the rule (omitting citations)
...The diversity of “brace” devices yielded a plethora of firearms with an attached “stabilizing brace” that possess objective design features indicative of firearms designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.[8] As explained in this rule, because a majority of these firearms with an attached “stabilizing brace” are configured as rifles and have a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length, they fall under the purview of the NFA...

... to the extent that an individual is unsure about whether a particular firearm with a particular attached “stabilizing brace” constitutes a rifle, that individual is free to request a classification determination from ATF for additional clarity. Moreover, ATF is publishing information simultaneously with this rule to inform members of the public of how they might be impacted based on (1) common weapon platforms with attached “stabilizing brace” brace designs and (2) examples of commercially available firearms with “stabilizing braces” that are short-barreled rifles. For individuals with such firearms equipped with a “stabilizing brace,” actions such as registration in the NFRTR will need to be taken as discussed in section V.B of this preamble. ATF will inform the public as new weapon platforms and “stabilizing braces” or other devices become available"
 
One of the current lawsuits points out that "rifle" and "pistol" are already clearly defined in the existing STATUTE and therefore do not require "interpretation" by the ATF. This may be the sword that cuts the Gordian knot.
 
old lady new shooter said:
...... a list of current braced pistols that will NOT be considered SBR's under the new rule?
Click to expand...
Literally impossible.
And thats why ATF stopped issuing determination letters on arm braces. They were getting hundreds of photos of braces not attached to a firearm. Being that they dont regulate accessories they required submissions to be attached to a firearm. They also warned that if that submission was determined to be an NFA firearm they would not return it.

That effectively ended further submissions.

No one can look at an particular arm brace BY ITSELF and say....."that is/is not an SBR". One would need to look at the entire firearm because it is the entire firearm that is evaluated.
 
old lady new shooter said:
One of the current lawsuits points out that "rifle" and "pistol" are already clearly defined in the existing STATUTE and therefore do not require "interpretation" by the ATF. This may be the sword that cuts the Gordian knot.
Click to expand...
Well, ATF/NFA Branch has been doing such "interpretation" for the last eighty nine years......how else do you think the original arm brace was determined to not result in the making of an NFA firearm?o_O

Remember, up until that determination in 2013, ATF had consistently held that anything attached to a pistol that allowed use as a shoulder stock was an SBR. No one complained about that ATF "interpretation" did they?:rofl:
 
dogtown tom said:
Well, ATF/NFA Branch has been doing such "interpretation" for the last eighty nine years......how else do you think the original arm brace was determined to not result in the making of an NFA firearm?o_O

Remember, up until that determination in 2013, ATF had consistently held that anything attached to a pistol that allowed use as a shoulder stock was an SBR. No one complained about that ATF "interpretation" did they?:rofl:
Click to expand...

I don't know about any of that. I just went looking for the statutory definitions of rifle and pistol and couldn't find them... I vaguely remember from the lawsuit that the pistol definition included something about the grip and the angle of the bore. Those two points don't change when a brace is attached.

dogtown tom said:
Nothing in that video discusses a firearms registry.
Good grief can you guys actually watch the drivel before posting the drivel?

There used to be a rule about "drive by" posts.
Click to expand...

Not related to that video, which I haven't watched, but ATF has apparently changed their approach to overseeing FFL's, now often pulling the license on a first infraction that may be a simple error on a form... and since every time an FFL goes out of business they get all the records of every sale ever made ... word is, they have a searchable database of everything in those records... leading some to believe that the reason they go straight to pulling the licenses is to increase the information in the database.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
It's Official: You have 120 days to register your Braced Weapon per the ATF
Replies
3
Views
429
Robert
Robert
F-111 John
  • Locked
Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached “Stabilizing Braces” [ATF Proposed Rulemaking]
Replies
9
Views
751
GEM
G
Pat Riot
  • Locked
ATF Rule on Braces Published Jan 31, 2023
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
125
Views
5K
rust collector
R
D
  • Locked
Can I register my "stabilizing brace" equipped firearm to my trust pursuant to ATF Final Rule 2021R-
Replies
4
Views
507
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
Sgt_Mike1
Marking Stabilization Brace after approval.
Replies
0
Views
257
Sgt_Mike1
Sgt_Mike1
Back
Top