User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
MN, USA
|
Posted: 3/21/2024 9:02:07 AM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By carbineone1964: Do not hear much..But they are are being sold again..So they are OK now..And I think that decision is being appealed to the SCOTUS so we wait...I am certain Garland will lose there..I am doubtful the SCOTUS will even hear the case or the ATF decides to just drop it and let it go.. Only question is, what happens on the Amnesty registered ones.. The approvals say "conditional" so I expect that they will again become "pistols" if those conditions no longer exist. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2024 9:46:06 PM EST
[Last Edit: tripntx]
[#2]
Another helpful court ruling https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2024/04/01/federal-judge-blocks-enforcement-of-atf-pistol-brace-rule-against-nra-members/
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20240401/nra-scores-legal-victory-against-atf-pistol-brace-rule-enjoined-from-going-into-effect-against-nra-members https://thereload.com/ruling-millions-of-nra-members-exempt-from-pistol-brace-ban/ |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2024 10:32:34 PM EST
[#3]
Brewer Firm Scores Legal Victory for NRA in “Pistol Brace” Lawsuit
https://www.brewerattorneys.com/news/2024/3/29/brewer-firms-scores-legal-victory-for-nra-in-pistol-brace-lawsuit |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/16/2024 10:26:29 AM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: The approvals say "conditional" so I expect that they will again become "pistols" if those conditions no longer exist. |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 4/16/2024 11:22:09 AM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By keith13b: What about those that put stocks on their newly minted and approved SBR's? They are no longer configured as pistols anymore. It's gonna be a shit show. The approvals specifically say "conditional" as I understand it. I didn't play the game so I have no dog in the race. I knew it wasn't going to hold water in court. |
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 5/1/2024 7:38:31 AM EST
[Last Edit: lw007]
[#6]
https://www.ammoland.com/2023/11/federal-judge-stays-entire-atf-pistol-brace-rule/
On Nov. 8, 2023, a Texas-based Federal District Court judge issued a nationwide stay preventing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from enforcing its rule on pistols equipped with stabilizing devices (2021R-08F). Recently, I talked with an AZ DPS Ranger who confirmed that a "pistol" with an arm brace is not considered an SBR as the above stay stops the rule from being enforced, nationwide. Has anyone been recently confronted by local, state, or federal law enforcement officers for having an arm brace on an AR-15 "pistol"? Thanks in advance for your thoughts. |
|
|
MO, USA
|
Posted: 5/10/2024 9:43:14 AM EST
[#7]
Has ATF been working on any submissions since the original stay was issued?
I have submissions still pending from May of last year. They still show up in my E-Forms account, but they are neither approved or denied. |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 5/10/2024 11:28:40 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BigHunt: Has ATF been working on any submissions since the original stay was issued? I have submissions still pending from May of last year. They still show up in my E-Forms account, but they are neither approved or denied. Word is, they stopped all activity due to the injunction. I have a sneaky feeling it will stay that way for a while, perhaps indefinitely. A lesson via Roe v Wade, there is a lot that they could lose by appealing further, and they have other battles to fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2024 10:03:53 AM EST
[#9]
Been out of the AR pistol game for awhile. Since this nationwide "stay" ruling thing, is it ok to sell my pistols with braces that I don't need?
Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2024 10:20:41 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Hunter8793: Been out of the AR pistol game for awhile. Since this nationwide "stay" ruling thing, is it ok to sell my pistols with braces that I don't need? Thanks. Yes. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/5/2024 8:53:04 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cincinnatus: Yes. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2024 9:36:23 AM EST
[#12]
|
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 6/13/2024 11:04:36 AM EST
[#13]
BRACE RULE IS DEAD!
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 6/14/2024 9:51:20 PM EST
[#14]
Ok hear me out. Who would trade making bump stocks illegal if in exchange SBRs and suppressors were removed from the purview of the NFA?
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 6/15/2024 8:31:53 AM EST
[#15]
So, for those with two “free” Form 1s pending, cancel them or just let them die naturally?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2024 8:33:25 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fire4effect69: Ok hear me out. Who would trade making bump stocks illegal if in exchange SBRs and suppressors were removed from the purview of the NFA? On principle, I’d say fuck no. I don’t own nor do I have any interest in owning a bumpstock. But that’s not a valid reason to say they should be banned just because I don’t have skin in the bumpstock game. Eventually they’ll come after something I do care about. Besides, if you give a mouse a cookie…. However, thinking practically, I’d make that trade. |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 6/15/2024 11:28:09 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fire4effect69: Ok hear me out. Who would trade making bump stocks illegal if in exchange SBRs and suppressors were removed from the purview of the NFA? Personally IDGAF for bump stocks, but on principle I say helles NO Give an inch, they take a mile. Be happy you can have a brace on your pistol and do with it what you wish. Suppressors were inches away from being removed from the NFA and then Mandalay Bay happened and scared off what little DFL support there was. We need a suppressor test case to challenge the constitutionality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/15/2024 1:08:45 PM EST
[#18]
Remember the last time we compromised?..This is what our representatives got for us !
 Attached File |
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 6/15/2024 2:11:09 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rlett4: Remember the last time we compromised?..This is what our representatives got for us ! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/160387/IMG_6183_jpeg-3241625.JPG And NRA was just a bunch of FUDD "sportsmen", then and now. |
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 6/16/2024 10:14:19 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Personally IDGAF for bump stocks, but on principle I say helles NO Give an inch, they take a mile. Be happy you can have a brace on your pistol and do with it what you wish. Suppressors were inches away from being removed from the NFA and then Mandalay Bay happened and scared off what little DFL support there was. We need a suppressor test case to challenge the constitutionality. Thats where I was going with my statement. The only hope as I see it to get anything removed from the NFA at this point is throwing the other side a bone. Hell, I can't afford the ammo to burn for a bump stock and honestly, I scratched the full auto itch when Uncle Sugar was buying it for me in the military. I would love a favorable SCOTUS ruling on suppressors but that'll be long time coming with a real chance the court makeup could change. |
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 6/16/2024 10:55:56 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fire4effect69: Thats where I was going with my statement. The only hope as I see it to get anything removed from the NFA at this point is throwing the other side a bone. Hell, I can't afford the ammo to burn for a bump stock and honestly, I scratched the full auto itch when Uncle Sugar was buying it for me in the military. I would love a favorable SCOTUS ruling on suppressors but that'll be long time coming with a real chance the court makeup could change. Unfortunately, I don't see them compromising on anything with the current state of affairs in DC. It's all TAKE, TAKE, TAKE, no give. Few on the left know or care to know what a suppressor actually does and doesn't do. They are like a snake, the body follows the head, no questions asked. The Courts are the only hope anymore, sadly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2024 9:45:09 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rlett4: Remember the last time we compromised?..This is what our representatives got for us ! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/160387/IMG_6183_jpeg-3241625.JPG Time is retarded. The Gun Control Act was 1968, not 1938. With its passing, it repealed the Federal Firearms Act of 1938. The GCA of 1968 is what created the FFL system and essentially ended mail order firearms. That whole excerpt from Time is just fucking stupid. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2024 10:14:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: KitBuilder]
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Luny421: Time is retarded. The Gun Control Act was 1968, not 1938. With its passing, it repealed the Federal Firearms Act of 1938. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Luny421: Time is retarded. The Gun Control Act was 1968, not 1938. With its passing, it repealed the Federal Firearms Act of 1938. Yeah, Time got the name wrong there. The GCA of 1968 is what created the FFL system and essentially ended mail order firearms. That whole excerpt from Time is just fucking stupid. From Google: The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 (FFA) imposed a federal license requirement on gun manufacturers, importers, and those persons in the business of selling firearms. GCA '68 made it where buyers had to receive transfer of firearms from an FFL within their own state (unless those buyers are cops or other FFLs). It also created the C&R FFL for personal acquisitions since the old mail-order stuff was otherwise cut off. It also restricted NFA imports, limiting them for government sales only, and added the new NFA category of DDs. (I can't remember when AOWs were added, so someone help me out if you know please). GCA 1968 also clarified that MG receivers are MGs all by themselves, and added "parts or collections of parts" specifically designed as conversion devices to the MG definition as well. The only good thing GCA did was to re-define rifles as SBRs when the barrel goes under 16" as opposed to <18" as it had previously been (except for the 16" exception they had previously added in the late 1930s for .22 LR). They also had the famous amnesty registration program, mainly due to all those war trophy (DEWATs) they had now re-defined into being MGs due to their intact receivers, but they also let people register everything (even if it was stolen from the US government). Of course, just like today, a lot of people chose not to register anything. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2024 6:13:31 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Unfortunately, I don't see them compromising on anything with the current state of affairs in DC. It's all TAKE, TAKE, TAKE, no give. Few on the left know or care to know what a suppressor actually does and doesn't do. They are like a snake, the body follows the head, no questions asked. The Courts are the only hope anymore, sadly. Celebrate these brace and bumpstock rulings for the massive legal victories they are. And keep supporting organizations like GOA and the FPC, who are proactively filing these type of lawsuits which win our natural rights back through legal proceedings. |
|
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 6/18/2024 12:05:23 PM EST
[#25]
My understanding is that original gun control of 1934 was initially intended for handguns. During the political wrangling, the barrel length restriction (18" for both shotgun and rifles) was also added because they figured people would saw them off to get around the handgun restrictions. By the time the act was voted in, handguns had been removed completely, but the barrel length restrictions remained.
Fast forward, and the rifle barrel length was amended to 16" after the government sold over a quarter million surplus M1 carbines to John Q. Public and realized they had 16" barrels, so the rifle length changed as a result. |
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 6/19/2024 2:08:52 PM EST
[#26]
Bumpstocks would be silly hill to die on, but this vacating the pistol brace rule is massive. Good deal.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/19/2024 11:27:22 PM EST
[Last Edit: Cincinnatus]
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Grendelsnap: Bumpstocks would be silly hill to die on, but this vacating the pistol brace rule is massive. Good deal. It was a fight to save semiautomatic weapons. Well worth the effort. Braces opens the door to the next fight. |
|
|
|
TN, USA
|
Posted: 6/20/2024 6:23:19 AM EST
[#28]
No thank you,
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 7/30/2024 5:54:53 AM EST
[#29]
Is the ATF appealing the final rule in mock v Garland?
|
|
|
MN, USA
|
Posted: 7/30/2024 9:08:41 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tr6r: Is the ATF appealing the final rule in mock v Garland? Haven't heard anything yet. I think it could be a mistake if they did, as they might stand to lose a lot more than they might gain. Braces and AR's are well into common use and the court has been handing down a lot of 2A favorable decisions of late. If AFT contends there is no difference between a brace and a stock, it could be decided that SBR restrictions in general are no longer valid and are in violation of the constitution. Look what happened to R v W.... |
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 8/1/2024 3:40:59 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By s4s4u: Haven't heard anything yet. I think it could be a mistake if they did, as they might stand to lose a lot more than they might gain. Braces and AR's are well into common use and the court has been handing down a lot of 2A favorable decisions of late. If AFT contends there is no difference between a brace and a stock, it could be decided that SBR restrictions in general are no longer valid and are in violation of the constitution. Look what happened to R v W.... Getting rid of the SBR restriction would be awesome as I've harped on. It's been a dumb restriction all along. That said with the smack down of Chevron I'm curious where the ATF is willing to commit resources now, especially where prosecutions are concerned. Depending on circumstances makes a court challenge more likely IMHO. Hopefully they'll throw everything against gang bangers and their Glock Switches and leave the rest of us the hell alone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2024 4:03:34 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fire4effect69: Hopefully they'll throw everything against gang bangers and their Glock Switches and leave the rest of us the hell alone. I want a glock switch too though :( |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2024 5:30:31 PM EST
[#33]
had a discussion with a "libertarian" friend who seemed to think it was still a matter of consideration. I thought fedbois failed to seek cert with ussc on the vacate decision and haven't proposed a new rule?
so we are back to status quo before they tried to reclassify everything and make us all felons. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 9/27/2024 7:21:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: Catalina]
[#34]
Elections have consequences. Don't forget to vote your rights.
President Obama "'Elections Have Consequences" "Elections have consequences," he told then number two Republican Rep. Eric Cantor. "And at the end of the day, I won. So I think on that one I trump you." Interesting turn of phrase. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2024 8:07:11 AM EST
[#35]
So does this mean all those freeBRs are invalid now? Is the atf going to let it sit as an appeal or something forever?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2024 8:09:48 AM EST
[#36]
Imagine that. Something that was never a law, but could send you to jail, is now not a law again, and congress, who make the laws, was never involved in any of it.
#makingstuffup |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2024 8:22:14 AM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By durtychemist: So does this mean all those freeBRs are invalid now? Is the atf going to let it sit as an appeal or something forever? They’re going to remain valid SBR registrations. All those people who said otherwise were incorrect. Whether the ATF tries harder in court is a whole other matter, but I doubt they will. They’re pretty thoroughly defeated on this particular issue. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2024 8:49:03 AM EST
[Last Edit: KitBuilder]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By _DR: Imagine that. Something that was never a law, but could send you to jail, is now not a law again, and congress, who make the laws, was never involved in any of it. Better to leave rule-making to the ATF via changes to CFR, publication in The Federal Register, etc. (which was all standardized under another Congressional act). With the recent USSC overturn of Chevron deference (which was the doctrine of judicial deference to a federal agency’s interpretation of any ambiguous statute) hopefully the legal landscape which resulted in such BS will improve slightly, but it’s still going to remain as a source of continued ATF bureaucratic bullshit. Older (more established and equally ridiculous) federal regulations (in CFR) aren’t going away without more huge legal battles, which should be fought, but are expensive to fund and difficult to win. It is still easier to overturn CFR than US Code however. |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 10/23/2024 6:53:10 PM EST
[#39]
So, that brace ban thing has been struck down all together for whole US, regardless of member ship in any organization, unless the gayTF wants to maybe appeal and then wins, an no word of that?
I would think this would be hard for them to do in light of that other non-firearms ussc case about excessive rule making. I think maybe it was a case against the EPA? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
