Summary please?

I didn't listen to the whole thing, too long.  

Preliminary Injunction denied for FRAC in North Dakota, and will most likely be appealed.
Here is a 2 minute version (much better).


At some point I'll get around to reading the actual ruling.

Two E Form 1 Brace amnesty individual

Done through Silencer Shop

Submitted 5/16

Approved 9/11 (interesting date)

118 days

Two submitted the same day, got notification of one approval early in the day on 9/11.

Couldn’t read the signature, maybe Blake something?

Attached File



The second one was approved later that day but by a different examiner.

Attached File

A federal injunction against the unconstitutional rule (which redefines a brace as a stock, making a pistol an SBR) is all well and good.  Except that it doesn't protect you from being prosecuted for shouldering a braced pistol.

My former braced pistol is now an SBR , and I can put any stock I want on it, and shoulder it any time I want without being afraid of being fined and sent to prison because some overzealous prosecutor convinces a jury that I'm a vicious criminal.

To me that makes it worth the intrusion (insofar as any easing of the pain the Constitutional violation the NFA is can ease that pain.)

118 days? Good grief, the one I did earlier this year took a month.

2 on 5/17 with eft prints…still waiting
Did one back in February it took 2 months.

Did mine on 4/5 and still crickets…

Submitted on 02-19
Approved 9-26

Good day for the good guys, in the 5th at least.  

A bit of an attack on the NFA here...real nice.  I've only been able to listen to a little bit of it so far.

Good to see this.  My time is severely limited right now but I will try to watch.  If you do get to the end please post a quick Cliffnotes version

Here is a good summary of the story:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/fifth-circuit-issues-preliminary-injunction-blocking-brace-ban-enforcement-against-plaintiffs-in-mock-v-garland/



Basically, this was the "official" decision after the Appeals Court kicked it back down and said....Good Guys will win, write it up as you see fit.  
So it applies to the named defendants only (including FPC members).

But the key is that while it didn't make a final decision on the 2A point, it did push the issue hard.  So it goes beyond just the APA violation, and it gets into braces being covered under the 2nd because they are clearly in common use for lawful purposes.   He also mentions "braces or stocks" in one of the statements.

TY, it is as I had thought it should be.  Looks promising at the least

Submitted 2 around 2/11/2023. One was approved around 7/15 final one approved  9/22 . Did eform for both on the same day and send fingerprint cards in together about 5 days later.

FPC members now part of the injunction…again.

Worth the price of admission ;) The language was 'all' and I didn't pick up any specifics on when one had to be a member. Small wins are wins...

I submitted two Form 1's on 5/8/2023.  The first came back as approved today (10/10/2023). I'm ready for the second one to follow soon.

Now I can have an adjustable stock on my 7.5" upper, and hopefully soon will have one on my 14.5" upper.

Moving them to a trust soon.

With all the court rulings of late.............are the braces legal again?

If you can find an FFL willing to transfer a complete firearm with one, let us know.  To date, none of the guys who do this for a living are acting like they think so.   Technically, you can probably get away with it as an individual living in the 5th circuit.  Some people think maybe even nation wide.  I would keep hardcopies of any court rulings (O'Connel) you think override the official .gov published regulations on the topic.

Thanks brother.............

If you're in Florida, I would be extra careful. I've touched on this elsewhere but there seems to be a government hard-on for this in Florida and there appears to be some nexus to Project Safe Neighborhoods.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjju52jnoKCAxWoHEQIHRGKA08QFnoECA8QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fsaf.org%2Ffbi-atf-arrest-of-florida-man-for-unregistered-short-barrel-rifle-showcases-absurdity-of-nfa%2F&usg=AOvVaw3ausqGQrd7P6gSyvp9HzkG&opi=89978449

If you belong to one of the groups that has received an injunction, you are legal in the use of a brace until there is a final "decision" by the upper court.  I belong to 3 of such groups so AFT can pound sand for now.

Interesting case.  Is there an ongoing thread about it?  

To summary.  Otherwise decent guy, basically was a dumbass and got railroaded for it.  He went to the trouble of legal registered suppressors, and then put an overtly illegal full-stock on his Scorpion pistol (not an armbrace), and showed it off.  



And got railroaded for it, in a discomforting overzeal for someone who isn't a threat to society or with a pattern of problems.  This should have been ignored, tossed, or at least minimal sentenced.  I once inquired about how often a Fed case is a railroad job, like this.  The answer I got back was somewhere around 1% - not often, not unheard of.

So why did he get railroaded?  Filling in blanks from I do know on how this works (and this is TOTAL out-of-my-ass crystal ball) - If I had to guess, the ICE criminal /  informant,  was probably related to trying to infiltrate a drug ring - FBI actually spends a good bit of time focusing on that.  (and TBH, they actually aren't that bad at it).   I'd give odds, the informant-snake was also an attractive female, who was very much trapped in a desperate situation herself, panic'd, and drowning-man going to do whatever it takes.  Scorpion-Guy did some pretty dumb OPSEC by knowingly blatantly violating NFA (he knew the game); and then inviting random person to his house to run those direct NFA violations.  Long haired creatures with an attractive smile, busts down dude's brains faster than any drug.   Anyway, my guess is informant's handlers really weren't even focused on this, but when it fell into their lap from dude texting her;  it's an easy stats pad conviction, and justification of how savvy you were at picking your informant agent you struck a deal with, because tadaa, it resulted in a conviction.  Look how strategically wise I am - promote me.  (beats the shit out of the alternative of: "Special Agent E'!?  WTF?  We wondered if you were a good hire, and here you are making informant deals with people we've busted; letting them go, wasting out time, and coming up with F'ing nothing!  Keep this shit up and we're sending over to Secret Service Presidential Dog Management ").  She needed her bust, with her informant.  And she got one.  and got her conviction and justification of "doing a good job", fucking over some guy who's real crime mostly was he was a naive dumbass.   Similar effect to when they raid the wrong house, they are going to toss the shit out of that house to for-love-of-God-find-SOMETHING.  My guess, even her fellow agents know she railroaded the dude for her check-box; but I doubt anyone lost much sleep over it.

Why did the Prosecutor take the case?  Because it was an easy win for him too.  The evidence was so complete, this was a Tuesday morning slam dunk.  If they have a pile of evidence making your case a clear and easy conviction, and your best card is "but I'm a good dude"; this isn't going to go well.

Also, FWIW, a bench judge doesn't have near the autonomy you might think.  I guarantee you that judge knew the dude was getting railroaded, and sometimes the judge will even pull a prosecutor aside and give him a "WTF man?".  Rare, but sometimes.  But the law on the books is the law, and so long as the upper courts are upholding it his hands are tied more than you might think.  

That's probably why he got railroaded.  He still got railroaded though.  This law needs to go away, and here's hoping O'Connel's start on that topic carries through.  

None of this is really related to arm-braces; which weren't involved (and the topic of this thread).  But I will say, keep this as a reminder of what internet bravado really can mean for real people.  Real people like you.  A whole lot of people have said a whole lot of tuff-guy stuff from their keyboards on the SBR topic, and encouraged a lot of other people to do stuff in a manner I don't really think was such a good service to the best interests of their fellow AR15.com team members.. or that's my personal opinion.  Fortunately, to date, I'm not aware of anyone railroaded on the armbrace topic.. yet.  Even better, I don't actually expect to see that any time soon.   the ones who manufacture/sell post Feb, '23, are the ones I'd advise to tread with great care right now (as in, probably best to just not do that right now).

I pretty much came to the same general conclusion as you did. Yes, it was a stock but all it takes is an overzealous agent/prosecutor to decide your armbrace is a stock and proceed accordingly. Court cases/decisions be damned. They have unlimited taxpayer money to make your life miserable if they want with no repercussions. As some in the LE community have stated you may beat the rap but you can't beat the ride. May be totally unrelated but I believe there was an MS-13 gang member in another high-profile case who shared the same last name as Mr. Mejia. My biggest concern is this is exactly the kind of charge that could be used to coerce someone to become an informant etc. in exchange for making a charge go away. Of course, we've all seen that movie before. Think "Ruby Ridge"

Missed the question about another thread about this case. Yes but it's archived I think and I can't find it now.

I'm still confused about if the injunction granted by the fifth circuit is valid for the whole country or just the fifth, specifically the FPC membership people.  Reading further, I've found two explanations for circuit court and where their decisions apply.  Here's one.  The arguments are if the decision has Binding authority or if has Pursuasive authority.  Here's another paper that discusses Nationwide Injunctions.  

Either the papers don't fully explain it, or my mind can't seem to grasp the answer to the question.  Can someone explain it to me in 8th grader language that I can present to others.  Thanks in advance.

According to the information I received when the original injunction was granted, all FPC members were covered.  I will see if I can find the email, but it was a while back.

I thought it was nationwide for FPC members as well, but someone at the club brought up the issue of jurisdiction of a circuit court.  Perhaps the legal wording is in the courts decision?

Here is mine from many months ago.




I'm in Illinois, so clearly not in the 5th.

Yes all I can say about the internet Bravados is this.. The Brave internet talkers would crying like little baby's for their mamma once they got to Leavenworth and met Bubba and his gang in the shower for a good time.. Fine to talk big about this stuff, and put those down that do not want to be Bubbas pet... But remember the consequence's, right or wrong are real.. The Law is still on their side.. I would much rather risk having have a freebie SBR than being Bubbas little pet..Maybe you would not.. To me the choice between the two is really not that hard of a decision to make.  You can hide your Brace I guess.. Oh what Brave fun that is..

All that sounds reasonable and that you have really thought this through.  Since you have researched this so thoroughly I would like to draw on your expertise on this matter if you don’t mind:

Why does one have to hide their brace?  Are braces now contraband/subject to confiscation if not registered?  Are their only two options, either register = safe, or don’t register be a criminal?

An armbrace on a <16" barreled firearm has now been redefined by the ATF as a configuration of a shoulder fired weapon, and subject to SBR regulations.  If you possess a firearm so configured, and are discovered, it will be viewed as an NFA violation and they have publicly and officially declared their intent to enforce it as such.  

Of the great many suits filed; one district judge in Texas says he doesn't agree.  And has given a temporary reprieve from enforcement for some people with some brands of units.  That other judges may or may not agree with.

ATF has not recanted or updated their declaration of intent to enforce.   To date, there has been no enforcement; though the industry as a whole has done a complete Cease and Desist on the whole topic.  After that judge's announcement, I have yet to find a manufacturer or FFL who trusts his decision to have enough weight to resume manufacture and sale.  We shall see.

To your question - for now, my expectation is few people with pre-existing units are likely for much harassment on the topic ... right now that is.  Unless you make yourself otherwise interesting.  If you have one and chose to run it, I doubt ATF will come find you.... for now.

Nobody here made this rule or cheered it on.

Pretty good summation ^^^

As far as the brace, even AFT indicates in their directive that it is okay to put a brace on a rifle with a 16" or longer barrel so I do not see how they can enforce posession of a brace as a crime.  Unless you get called out on a public range or shoot somebody with your braced "pistol" there is literally no likelyhood of being prosecuted.  Well, unless you unwittingly invite an AFT agent to shoot privately with you.....

Thank you for the reply.  Very useful information.  But trying to clarify for myself further, it is my understanding that the weapon is the issue and the brace is merely a stock. As such the mere possession of a brace is the same as possessing any other extra gun stock.  Am I on the right track or is the brace itself now a prohibited item?

Thanks!  I replied with that very question before I read your text.  I appreciate it.

You're absolutely right.
Brace = stock.

So is the FPC our last hope for non NFA pistol ar15s? I'm sure theyre getting a lot of new members lately!

You can have all the pistols you want as long as they don’t have a brace.

But let's be honest here, how many of us would have purchased that 10.5" ar if all you could run was a dickbutt nub buffer tube on the back lol

But, honestly, you can put whatever you want on that buffer tube in the comfort of your own surroundings.  If the S h's the F, it won't matter.  Pack what you want.

If you are stuck shooting at public ranges with FUDDy RSO's, pay the tax to play the game

I would have, but I would not own as many.  
I would also have been quicker to run a buffer-less version.

Have not listened to it yet.  Hopefully it is not click-bait (he usually isn't).

Ya, I know.  But, we are starved for a resolution.  

I am so weary of guntubers.  So many were so far in left field on the 4999 directives it was rediculous

I'd think FPC would be on top of something like this

Because I was listening to his OTHER video on what is happening in the 7th (the Illinois BS we are dealing with).  I have now listened to it, and I'm sure by now you are seeing the threads in GD.

Nationwide injunction granted.

https://thereload.com/federal-judge-blocks-nationwide-enforcement-of-pistol-brace-ban

This is positive news.

I am sure we all hope the atf loses this case in the end, right?

Some have indicated that they may lose the entire NFA, in relation to SBR definitions and the tax.  Now that would be positive news.

Yeah that'd be great!
I'd really love my post samples to become "normal" guns.

What would be great would be if the court finds it unconstitutional to define the barrel length that determines a "rifle" and orders AFT to refund all tax payments accrued since the inception of the NFA.

ETA:  AND, expunge all records of registrations.

I know....dreaming....but if yer gonna dream....