Here is what the ATF says about swapping a brace for a stock in their FAQ's

Attached File


Note that they say "once the firearm is registered" which means one you get your approved Form 1 back. Until you receive an approved Form 1, then your best bet is to leave the brace on.

Is the Thordsen cheek rest system considered a brace?

Hmmm. Interesting device.

Wait.  This says that if you change the length of an sbr you need to notify them?  Everything I have read says you can freely swap uppers on a SBR.  Is this another change?

Came here to ask this , as I have one on one of my pistols.

Generally, it’s recommended you notify of a permanent change.  Swapping uppers back and forth while still having the capability to revert to the original configuration still appears fine.

Yes that is a bit confusing. In reality you only need to notify them if the change of length is a permanent change. As WUPHF states, as long as you keep the original upper and easily return the SBR into the original configuration at time of registration then you do not need to notify the ATF.

Thordsen has a couple of statements on their Facebook page.  

https://www.facebook.com/ThordsenCustoms

I thought the same thing. I have been in the Palmetto State Armory store and seen the 4473 kiosk section in chaos because the normal Joe Citizen is confused. They have a couple people there helping too. I can not see the millions at home on their PCs or tiny smart phones trying to fill out the form 1s.

As long as the cheek rest doesn’t add any more length past 6.5 inches you should be good. Unless some butt munching inspector decides horizontal surface area counts as well in addition to the LoP.

@Stambo2A
Delivered at 9:55 this morning. Oh by the way, a disapproved form 1 for a braced pistol “will result in an enforcement action”. Even for “open background” denial after 88 days

What are the odds that they won’t approve a ton of these “waived tax” form 1s and just come collect them?

That thought occured to you as well?  As I have already said, it is just a backdoor registration ploy.  And if you are denied, guess what, knock knock knock.  Better hide yer dog

If they deny you....put a 16 inch barrel and go about your business............

1) In a free state. Absolutely. A lot of folks in here seem to miss the point that they do have this option. Everyone seems to be running ragged trying to figure out how to have their cake and eat it too. It’s almost as if the ATF is saying, “Yup, it’s exactly what it seems. Here’s your options out of it.”


2) In my ban state, not an option. It’s either lose the brace and go about your business, or non compliance. All while waiting to see if the state amends the AW ban to add “Other firearm” to the codex. Then it’s back to traditional stock weapons like the M1A, Mini 14, or PC Carbine. We’d probably lose the ability to buy JIC and Shockwave pump guns as well.

Seems to be a lot of going back and forth on just removing the brace which is what I would prefer to do since I have gorilla arms and can't really shoulder a brace comfortably anyway.

All my pistol buffer tubes are slick carbine buffer length at about 7" long.

Does it have to be shorter?
Is there anything concrete on a specific measurement number?
Does it have something to do with not being able to install a brace at all and is buffer tube length a part of that?

My primary AR pistol I use is the gun that I keep in my truck tool box. I am certain I would not want to keep an NFA item there, so I would need to find a different gun to do that with

Based on the ATF Q&A at Shot Show video that was posted in the GD thread, it would appear that a bare standard carbine length extension is GTG as long as you don't also have access to a spare stock or brace.


ETA: https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/Pistol-brace-rule-signed/5-2616053/?page=66#i102424105

So what if my pistol has a bare carbine buffer tube and my carbine has a brace on it's original carbine buffer tube?

It’s A SHITSHOW.

I bet it could get expensive to prove you are in the grey.
Why have the brace period?  would look more suspicious and same penalty as throwing a stock on the "pistol" at this point.

But they will still have the information that they wanted all along

This may come as a shock to many here but there are people in this country with various physical limitations who appreciate the features of a pistol brace.

I've kept quiet on this for sometime,  but yes.....

I have most use of one arm, and little use in the other. I used a bipod on a pistol for a long time at a bench. But oh wait, that cud be a vertical fore grip on a pistol, so I stopped shooting that.. Braces came along, it was nice, I could shoot standing again. But oh wait it might be a stock, so I sold it.

Now, it's a stock and had I kept it I would have to register it. I've heard over and over people say using the brace was a work around for sbr's. In some cases it was I'm sure, but not all.

I'm back to rifles only, on a bench, with a bipod and sand bags. No standing and shooting anymore for me. I can't shoot a 'typical' hand gun well either. A braced pistol was my best option.

It sucks that there's no exemption for disability in the law.

Perhaps, if ATF hadn't exceeded its authority in authorizing braces as pistols in 2012, we might have gotten such an exemption for bipods and stocks for pistols if you could show a disability through Congress.

But the law doesn't care.

And it sucks.

I guess I’m not super worried. I already have a lot of NFA stuff, so if I can get a tax free SBR, then cool. If not, I’ll just pay the tax and do the normal F1 after the fact. Wouldn’t be my first one

Has the rule been posted and is the 120 day registration period started?

common sense........and not some reply replete with insanity.  Has the 120 day window started yet.......published yet?

collect what? destroy the brace......put a 16 inch on the firearm.........or destroy the whole ball of wax........turn it in..........

You dont think they already have that? LOL

I have purchased 4 firearms in the last month so they already have all the info they need.
If for some odd reason my form 1's dont get approved I will slap a pistol tube on and go about my life.

They know you bought something, they don't know that you still have something.  If you SBR, you have to keep them informed that you still have something.  Big difference.

On the technical side, that's one question I'm trying to get better clarification on.  When I aske this directly to the NFA / SBR boys here, they are all saying that no, the lower can be sold with impunity and without notification, so long as it is not configured as an SBR.   Which basically means, so long as you don't keep it in SBR form, you actually don't have to inform them of it's deposition.  And the only time it will ever come up, is if the buyer of your AR15 rifle or pistol (type 1), tries himself to convert it into and license it as an SBR (Type 2), will it ever come up that the gun is already registered as that, and that's his problem, not yours.  Is what the guys who do this have been saying.  I'll agree, it doesn't make sense to me either, and I'm kind of poking around for something more official on that.  But from what I can tell, people can register an SBR, and over time upgrade the upper back to a regular rifle, and then completely forget about it and never think about it again, including sell or transfer the gun like nothing ever happened.   That's what they keep telling me, and the ATF Q&A video semi-confirmed it.  I guess message is, unlike Machine Guns, ONce an SBR, does not mean Always an SBR.

Assume for the moment the ATF action stands. So, if you were to register your braced pistol as an SBR, logically you would then be able to substitute a stock for the brace because the firearm is now an SBR and the brace is being formally treated as a stock anyway. Nothing prohibits you from changing stocks on an SBR.

If you had any plans to create an SBR, why would you not take advantage and do it TAX FREE ?

True, but if you continue to posess the short barreled upper, even though you pin a long barreled upper on the SBR'ed lower, you would technically still posess an SBR.  This is unless you also posess a legal pistol lower, one with a plain round buffer tube, which is still legal even according to the new AFT directive.  All of which again begs the question, why bother?  I can posess a pistol lower with a short barreled upper as well as a legal rifle with a stock and 16" barrel.  If I decide I want to play with an SBR it takes less than a minute to pop the pins and swap the uppers and then swap back.  The only issue would be if I were to shoot at a public range, which I do not, or if I were to shoot a perp in my home and called the authorities thereafter.  In that case all I would have to do is pin the pistol lower back to the short barreled upper and throw another one into the carcass for good measure.  It is so convoluted and pointless.....

IF you had plans to do so it makes perfect sense.  IF, being the operative word.

Sure.  There's a lot of ways to look at this.   Frankly, I look at it as a hedge.   In 10 years, who knows what they are going to do.  Having a portion of your AR's already in the NFA, may not be the worst move. Having a portion of your AR's very much not in the NFA as well, may not be the worst move.

I believe page 162 specifically mentions what lengths they consider to be not intended for shoulder fire. Just think about the term you used though, a "carbine" buffer tube. What classification does carbine fall under? Last time I checked, a carbine was a rifle.

Perhaps the term "6-position buffer tube" would be more appropriate?  People call it a carbine buffer tube, primarily because it is what is installed on carbines.  The Thordsen device installs on a 6-position buffer tube, or carbine buffer tube, but it isn't "shoulderable".  It is just a mess, and AFT wants it that way.  Intimidation.

There are many ways to try and comply with the new ATF rule. First, the ATF rule isn't a law only congress can make law. I'm sure there are already court papers filed to cancel this out. I for one will wait 30 to 40 days to see how this works out. The 200.00 wavier on filing fee sounds great for those wanting to SBR their pistols but, may be a trap with the 88 day approval. Thank about that.

I've been in the trucking industry over 40 years now.......US DOT makes rules all the time and changes those in place all the time too...........that said, when you break the rule......you break the law...........trust me.

FAA is the king of rule making in the highly technical realm of aviation. But I the difference is criminal vs civil penalties. I can get my license pulled but jail is generally not a possibility.

ATF is a federal agency.

Federal agencies can promulgate "rules."  Its a convoluted - but well-established procedure. A final rule by a federal agency has full force of law (unless a Court rules - or a jury decides) - that the law is bullshit.

Same applies to "regulations." Agencies can promulgate regulations. The terminology "rules" and "regulations" gets used synonymously in the area of administrative law. There may be some differences between what constitutes federal-agency rule versus a federal-agency regulation, but any such distinction is not germane here.

See https://www.federalregister.gov/uploads/2011/01/the_rulemaking_process.pdf

Attached File


I'm pretty sure the current goat-fuck with the pistol-braces is within the category of an "INTERPRETIVE RULE."

Attached File


So, while FBATFe chose to publish the interpretive rule in the Federal Register (FR) (see https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/10/2021-12176/factoring-criteria-for-firearms-with-attached-stabilizing-braces ), I don't think the interpretive rule will be copied into a new section of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Here, a federal law enforcement agency is interpreting the United States Code, National Firearms Act, which is a federal "STATUTE."

This language is interesting:
The 
interpretive
 rule 
or 
policy 
statement 
must 
not 
set 
new
 legal
 standards 
or 
impose
 new
 requirements.
This is sort of a chicken-or-the-egg concept in this context.
Is FBATFe "setting a new legal standard" by iterpreting the United States Code in a manner inconsistent with the way FBATFe previously interpreted the United States Code?

Can a firearm that violates the new "intpretation" be the basis of a criminal prosecution under NFA?... Or it it just contraband under the new "intpretation" (perhaps subject to seizure pending outcome of a criminal prosecution). What if FBATFe cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the firearm isn't a pistol or some other sort of weapon not specifically covered by the NFA? Its a fair argument - perhaps not a WINNING argument - that just because FBATFe chooses to use 26 printed pages in the Federal Register (see https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-06-10/pdf/2021-12176.pdf ) to argue their interpretion, it does not mean their interpretation is CORRECT. I'm not volunteering to be the test-case in a criminal prosecution. But if I were defending a person charged in that capacity, I would do all I could to baffle them with bullshit and using those 26 pages from the Federal Register to argue that this is absolute nonsense, and that there is no way a person could reasonably know that those 26 pages should be the basis for attaching criminal liability beyond a reasonable doubt.

Even FBATFe couldn't make up their mind about the subject for years. And I would point that out too. So while their new interpretation may say one thing, that doesn't change the previously-clear language of the National Firearms Act. At least I would argue that. I know it would be fun to print out the one page from the NFA, and hold that in one hand, while holding 26 pages of Administrative-Interpretation bullshit in the other hand. I might even drop all 26 pages on the floor in front of the jury (by accident of course). It might even happen twice - while I wear my "confused look" as I try to page all that bullshit back into a proper pile. You don't always win based on the dry facts or the black-letter law. Trials can be theater. But its a dangerous game for the client.

In what sane world does the definition of a "short-barreled rifle" go from being three lines on a small part of one page (see https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/921 to TWENTY-SIX PAGES of convoluted gobbledy-gook?

Attached File


Attached File



Did they get it wrong in the first place? Are they now disingenuously attempting to reverse course by a convoluted new interpretation?

Attached File

Yes the length of a pistol buffer tube to keep your pistol from being considered a SBR is stated on page 162 of the Factoring Criteria document and it definitely states 6 - 6 1/2 inches in length. Most MIL-SPEC carbine buffer tubes AKA 4 or 6 position buffer tubes are at least 7 - 7 1/4 inches in length.


When I measured my pistol buffer tube and one of my 6 position carbine buffer tubes, they were 6 1/8 inches for pistol tube and 7 1/8 inches for the carbine tube. These measurements were from the plate to the end of the buffer tube. Now the ATF did not say how they got their measurements but they way I measured matches what they want for a pistol buffer tube.

Might want to watch this before you do anything. It's about registering your pistol as a sbr. From GOA at shot show.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DggOmUXxVWY

This is kinda ugly too.  Kinda, hell.

So has this been entered into the Federal Registry yet? Maybe I missed it but it's been a week.

You guys might want to check out pages 143 to 145, there is a definite opinion on what features of a buffer tube contribute to whether or not a weapon is intended to be shoulder fired. So even if your tube hits their "Magic" number, if it has notches, dimples, or slots, it'll be a no go.

Pages 143-145 talk about the different types of buffer tubes that allows for a brace or stock to lock into different positions allowing the length of pull to be adjusted. And yes they showed a pistol type buffer tube with dimples for a set screw to lock into in this section.

On page 162 they are saying that s smooth pistol buffer tube without any way to lock a brace or stock in place is still legal and they will not consider an AR pistol with a smooth pistol brace with a length of 6 - 6 1/2 inches a SBR.

So there is definitely a difference in the types of buffer tubes talked about on pages 143-145 versus what is talked about on page 162

You do not have to inform them if you no longer have an SBR. I can legally put a 16" barrel on it and sell it, and I could destroy it and I am not required to inform them.
I can if I want but its not a requirement.