User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:38:41 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Am I correct that if you take the brace off none of this point nonsense matters and its legal as is with just a buffer tube they way they used to be ? Yes, but only until they change their minds on that…. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:40:01 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nope... Fails badly. They go over an SBA 3 in the document. 8 points. Even a Shockwave Blade fails with 5 points, although it would pass if it came with a proper length strap.....for now....unless they go back and say the slots for a sling now add another point...then it would fail again. FATF The shockwave blade loses a point if you install it on a bare pistol buffer tube with no setscrew detents (AFT calls them "notches"). Still hits the 4 points though. These criteria are just an underhanded way to rescind their prior approval of these braces. They don't state whether an end user can add a strap to a shockwave blade to bring it into compliance. Also the SBPDW looks like a no-go using their points system. They do say removing the brace from the pistol and disposing of it is a remedy. But it's unclear why you would need to dispose of it if you also own a 16" rifle you could attach it to. Additionally, the sights can't be flip up rifle sights. They have to be something with eye relief suitable for firing at arm's length. I think a red dot sight is okay here. A long eye relief pistol scope should be okay too, but it would probably draw unnecessary attention. Also, if the gun is light enough to be held in one hand easily without the use of a brace, adding a brace is a no-go. All those Roni style stabilizing braces for glocks are out. A lot of the SB tactical braces that look like stocks lose points just because they look like a stock. God forbid they let your goofy-ass stabilizing brace try to look less like the shitty lump of rubber it is. If you're going to be allowed to have one, it will be required to look ugly as fuck. But all of that is beside the point. It isn't a rule yet. If you're trying to understand these rules in order to comply with them, you've already given up. we need to read and understand these proposed rules in order to better formulate intelligent, well considered comments. if the ammo rule was not applied, there is a chance this one will get a pass too, if enough people submit enough comments opposing it. But, comments must follow the correct protocol and must be respectful and well-reasoned. As they say, you get more flies with honey than you do with shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:40:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Meh. Fuck the ATF and their partisan politics bullshit. Yet another reason the ATF should be disbanded and their employees separated from “federal service” playing games with our rights based on which direction the political winds blow. Spending up to $303 million of our tax dollars to bend us over a barrel. As long as its a 16"... I have a blade, folding sights, and a red dot. I also have a 3d printer... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:41:22 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, but only until they change their minds on that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Am I correct that if you take the brace off none of this point nonsense matters and its legal as is with just a buffer tube they way they used to be ? Yes, but only until they change their minds on that. Once again - the Democrats aren't interested in compliance . . . . |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:45:41 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What if the pistol is over 26" and becomes a firearm? It looks like if the gun is over 26" that point list means nothing. Over 26" with a brace = SBR Did you read the proposed rule? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:46:33 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Except they lied because the flip up sights put it at 5 points. Gotcha! Off to "federal pound me in the ass prison" for you! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/128204/29C35C00-5B94-457F-B33E-662EE76AFCC1_png-1971096.JPG Here is the pic the included of a legal braced pistol Except they lied because the flip up sights put it at 5 points. Gotcha! Off to "federal pound me in the ass prison" for you! How do you get 5 points? Sections 2 and 3 are independent. You don’t add the values from both sections to get a total. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:50:48 PM EDT
[#7]
I'm looking again, and maybe the Tailhook Mod 1 does pass.
Tough to say. The SBA Mini passed, and it had a "2" for surface area. The SBA 3 failed, and it had a "3" for surface area. The end of the Tailhook is a lot like the SBA Mini, except the Tailhook does not have any material that covers the end of the buffer tube. In that sense, it could be considered a 1....maybe....like the fin style braces (Magpul or Shockwave). If it gets a 1, it passes, if it gets a 2 it fails. That is the problem...no one knows. If a Mod 1 passes, why would a Mod 2 fail simply for being adjustable? Hell, if I take a Mod 1 and drill out the QD slot, does it become legal, regardless of the rear surface. Stupid arbitrary laws are stupid and arbitrary. I'm pretty sure the industry will be pushing back hard. I think the ATF overstepped again. The fact that they can decide you still have an SBR even if you don't hit the point limit is BS. I'm tired of thinking about it. When my Mod 1 C comes in, I will have 5 different styles of braces because I was trying to keep up and stay legal. I'm done. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:53:15 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Everyone keeps forgetting this: In most states, non compliance is an option since nobody knows where they went, and with no UBC, you can plausibly say "I sold that years ago." HOWEVER in some states, there's 100% registration of handguns (MD is one of them) or "wink wink wink" unofficial registration (PA State Police) of handguns. Once BATFE finalises their rules and says that a SBA3 brace makes it a SBR...All these police departments have to do is CTRL-F their databases for firearms that were shipped in factory configuration with SBA3 braces (the anti gun groups will helpfully send lists of firearms with SBA3 braces as stock) and then send form letters to the owners of those guns: "ATTN [$NAME] You have $GUN_WITH_SBA3 [$SERIAL]. Per BATFE it is now an illegal SBR. Turn it in; before we come to your door with a bearcat. Love and kisses, $NAME$ State Police" That's what's so terrifyingly dangerous about this whole proposed rule. or take the SBA3 off and presto, not an illegal SBR. Even put on one that is legal. you know they will be made and sold. And now that an SBA3 makes something an SBR, if you have a rifle or SBR it is now a spare stock for it, so legal to have |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:53:28 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So does a 10.5 with a sba3 pass? Asking for America? If you look at the example provided in the document, the SBA3 gets 8 points in section 2, which by their standards makes it a stock just based on design features, and if you put it on a pistol, it’s a SBR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:56:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, but only until they change their minds on that…. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Am I correct that if you take the brace off none of this point nonsense matters and its legal as is with just a buffer tube they way they used to be ? Yes, but only until they change their minds on that…. I get that. Would be harder though I think. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:57:46 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: IIRC Heller is silent on SBRs and the NFA and silent on any tax and/or registration requirement, its claim to fame was "common use" Didn’t Alito gift the American people a codification of “common use” in Caetano? 200,000. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:57:54 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The shockwave blade loses a point if you install it on a bare pistol buffer tube with no setscrew detents (AFT calls them "notches"). Still hits the 4 points though. These criteria are just an underhanded way to rescind their prior approval of these braces. They don't state whether an end user can add a strap to a shockwave blade to bring it into compliance. Also the SBPDW looks like a no-go using their points system. They do say removing the brace from the pistol and disposing of it is a remedy. But it's unclear why you would need to dispose of it if you also own a 16" rifle you could attach it to. Additionally, the sights can't be flip up rifle sights. They have to be something with eye relief suitable for firing at arm's length. I think a red dot sight is okay here. A long eye relief pistol scope should be okay too, but it would probably draw unnecessary attention. Also, if the gun is light enough to be held in one hand easily without the use of a brace, adding a brace is a no-go. All those Roni style stabilizing braces for glocks are out. A lot of the SB tactical braces that look like stocks lose points just because they look like a stock. God forbid they let your goofy-ass stabilizing brace try to look less like the shitty lump of rubber it is. If you're going to be allowed to have one, it will be required to look ugly as fuck. But all of that is beside the point. It isn't a rule yet. If you're trying to understand these rules in order to comply with them, you've already given up. we need to read and understand these proposed rules in order to better formulate intelligent, well considered comments. if the ammo rule was not applied, there is a chance this one will get a pass too, if enough people submit enough comments opposing it. But, comments must follow the correct protocol and must be respectful and well-reasoned. As they say, you get more flies with honey than you do with shit. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Nope... Fails badly. They go over an SBA 3 in the document. 8 points. Even a Shockwave Blade fails with 5 points, although it would pass if it came with a proper length strap.....for now....unless they go back and say the slots for a sling now add another point...then it would fail again. FATF The shockwave blade loses a point if you install it on a bare pistol buffer tube with no setscrew detents (AFT calls them "notches"). Still hits the 4 points though. These criteria are just an underhanded way to rescind their prior approval of these braces. They don't state whether an end user can add a strap to a shockwave blade to bring it into compliance. Also the SBPDW looks like a no-go using their points system. They do say removing the brace from the pistol and disposing of it is a remedy. But it's unclear why you would need to dispose of it if you also own a 16" rifle you could attach it to. Additionally, the sights can't be flip up rifle sights. They have to be something with eye relief suitable for firing at arm's length. I think a red dot sight is okay here. A long eye relief pistol scope should be okay too, but it would probably draw unnecessary attention. Also, if the gun is light enough to be held in one hand easily without the use of a brace, adding a brace is a no-go. All those Roni style stabilizing braces for glocks are out. A lot of the SB tactical braces that look like stocks lose points just because they look like a stock. God forbid they let your goofy-ass stabilizing brace try to look less like the shitty lump of rubber it is. If you're going to be allowed to have one, it will be required to look ugly as fuck. But all of that is beside the point. It isn't a rule yet. If you're trying to understand these rules in order to comply with them, you've already given up. we need to read and understand these proposed rules in order to better formulate intelligent, well considered comments. if the ammo rule was not applied, there is a chance this one will get a pass too, if enough people submit enough comments opposing it. But, comments must follow the correct protocol and must be respectful and well-reasoned. As they say, you get more flies with honey than you do with shit. +1 gotta try. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2021 11:59:21 PM EDT
[#13]
Having trouble grasping the logic in the max 120 weight restriction. A brace is to help stabilize the gun because of weight but if the gun is too heavy the brace is really a stock so it is an SBR but if you take the brace off it is a pistol that is heavy and you can't stabilize it or is it now also a SBR just with a tube?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:01:09 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Am I correct that if you take the brace off none of this point nonsense matters and its legal as is with just a buffer tube they way they used to be ? You could easily argue in court that if the weight and other accessory types wouldn't disqualify a gun from being a pistol without a brace, then they shouldn't disqualify a pistol with a brace. In the proposed rule, the ATF mentions using a brace with a buffer tube longer than 6.5" shows intent to fire from the shoulder. But they don't state whether such a buffer tube alone shows the same intent. They do say removing a brace and discarding it converts it back to a "pistol". But what if it was built with an extended buffer tube from day one? Does that fall under their "intent" argument? Would you need to buy a short pistol buffer tube? Are they going to argue the buffer tube itself is a brace? Can length of pull alone, even in the absence of a brace, be used to determine that a pistol is an SBR? Can the addition of rifle type sights on a pistol change its classification, even in the absence of a brace? Can the addition of a hand stop on a pistol in the absence of a brace change it to an SBR? Some machine pistols had hand stops and lacked stocks. They also mention modifications to braces to make them unsuitable for firing from the shoulder, but offer no guidance or examples of such modifications. Would an uncomfortable, sharp, rearward facing spike make the difference? They do hint that a sling swivel attachment point on the end of a buffer tube suggests design and intent NOT to be fired from the shoulder. It seems that depending on how you accessorize a pistol without a brace you could conceivably add up to more points than a pistol with a brace that passes their test. There are a lot of unanswered questions in this NPRM. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:02:22 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How do you get 5 points? Sections 2 and 3 are independent. You don't add the values from both sections to get a total. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/128204/29C35C00-5B94-457F-B33E-662EE76AFCC1_png-1971096.JPG Here is the pic the included of a legal braced pistol Except they lied because the flip up sights put it at 5 points. Gotcha! Off to "federal pound me in the ass prison" for you! How do you get 5 points? Sections 2 and 3 are independent. You don't add the values from both sections to get a total. What a stupid system they have conceived. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:02:50 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The shockwave blade loses a point if you install it on a bare pistol buffer tube with no setscrew detents (AFT calls them "notches"). Still hits the 4 points though. These criteria are just an underhanded way to rescind their prior approval of these braces. They don't state whether an end user can add a strap to a shockwave blade to bring it into compliance. Also the SBPDW looks like a no-go using their points system. They do say removing the brace from the pistol and disposing of it is a remedy. But it's unclear why you would need to dispose of it if you also own a 16" rifle you could attach it to. Additionally, the sights can't be flip up rifle sights. They have to be something with eye relief suitable for firing at arm's length. I think a red dot sight is okay here. A long eye relief pistol scope should be okay too, but it would probably draw unnecessary attention. Also, if the gun is light enough to be held in one hand easily without the use of a brace, adding a brace is a no-go. All those Roni style stabilizing braces for glocks are out. A lot of the SB tactical braces that look like stocks lose points just because they look like a stock. God forbid they let your goofy-ass stabilizing brace try to look less like the shitty lump of rubber it is. If you're going to be allowed to have one, it will be required to look ugly as fuck. But all of that is beside the point. It isn't a rule yet. If you're trying to understand these rules in order to comply with them, you've already given up. we need to read and understand these proposed rules in order to better formulate intelligent, well considered comments. if the ammo rule was not applied, there is a chance this one will get a pass too, if enough people submit enough comments opposing it. But, comments must follow the correct protocol and must be respectful and well-reasoned. As they say, you get more flies with honey than you do with shit. Oh I'll be commenting again, no worries. Trying to understand what is legal and what isn't is frustrating....but it allows for holes to be poked in their argument. Bumpstocks to braces.....seems like ATF approval letters don't mean a damn thing. They are screwing themselves in court in the long run. It just might take some time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:03:43 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Again, the other option is do nothing. Fuck you guys. Stop being such defeatist pussies. And speaking to representatives as constituents in some cases be effective. Even if it is they won't help you, but maybe they won't go out of their way to fuck you. Yeah it might be pointless but speaking up is still better then being silent. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So is this a nothingburger or what? No. Call both of your Senators and your Representative Both of my senators are worthless leftists Still call. Yeah probably won't matter. Still do it. Hell lie and tell them you voted for them, but don't support this stuff. Sound sincere and super disappointed. It's funny that anyone thinks that actually works. Their minds are already made up. By money or threats. Or both.  Again, the other option is do nothing. Fuck you guys. Stop being such defeatist pussies. And speaking to representatives as constituents in some cases be effective. Even if it is they won't help you, but maybe they won't go out of their way to fuck you. Yeah it might be pointless but speaking up is still better then being silent. It's usually the silent ones you watch out for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:06:01 AM EDT
[#18]
And we still call this the land of the free.
Shameful. Disgusting. Unconstitutional. Anarcho-tyrannical kakistocracy at its scummiest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:06:11 AM EDT
[#19]
This is why the left wins with these things. (Besides cheating). They stick together. We don't. As seen clearly in this thread.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:07:13 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What a stupid system they have conceived. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/128204/29C35C00-5B94-457F-B33E-662EE76AFCC1_png-1971096.JPG Here is the pic the included of a legal braced pistol Except they lied because the flip up sights put it at 5 points. Gotcha! Off to "federal pound me in the ass prison" for you! How do you get 5 points? Sections 2 and 3 are independent. You don't add the values from both sections to get a total. What a stupid system they have conceived. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:07:18 AM EDT
[#21]
I have reached this point with .gov reinterpretation of regulations.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:07:57 AM EDT
[#22]
I bet not a single "conservative" radio talk show will even bring this up.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:10:29 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: DO NOT OVERLOOK THIS. Even if you pass the points, you will NEVER legally be able to shoulder it. No youtube videos, no getting past range nazis etc. I must have missed that. I'll have to look again tomorrow, I'm so sick of reading and rereading today |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:11:25 AM EDT
[#24]
 I’m not going to jail for ten years Fucking count on that, AFT fags |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:12:44 AM EDT
[#25]
I think the people trying to analyze this for loopholes or possible mechanisms to prove compliance are looking at it wrong. They state in the reg that they are promulgating this to stop people from getting around NFA registration and tax requirements. That is a wholly subjective standard and anything that looks or functions like an SBR falls within it. It doesn't matter what you do. If you have something that looks like an SBR and they decide to come after you, they will get a conviction at a trial court (barring nullification) because you were evading taxes and registration. It's that simple.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:21:39 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not going to jail for ten years Fucking count on that, AFT fags |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:27:31 AM EDT
[#27]
So the ATF responds to their poor interpretation of law by trying to implement a codified system of interpretation... but this time one which seemis to intentionally fail everything. Ergo, it is merely there to give the appearance something is capable of passing.
Why even play games at this point? Incrementalism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:32:03 AM EDT
[#28]
I have a cz scorpion purchased through gunbroker sitting at the FFL awaiting my return from Iraq right now. Are these rules in effect now? Do the rules need to go through the comment period before being signed? Just curious if I done fucked up by not waiting and now I’m out $1300 because the FFL won’t be able to do the transfer.
Edit: Disregard. Questions were answered in previous comments. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:35:49 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have a cz scorpion purchased through gunbroker sitting at the FFL awaiting my return from Iraq right now. Are these rules in effect now? Do the rules need to go through the comment period before being signed? Just curious if I done fucked up by not waiting and now I’m out $1300 because the FFL won’t be able to do the transfer. No dealer with a spine is going to deny you your purchase. Nobody should follow this garbage. Buy and do whatever you want. I'm just buying regular stocks instead of pistol braces now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:40:14 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Brace yourselves! Here it is ... Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached “Stabilizing Braces”and, Direct Link to Proposed Rule 2021R-08 (PDF, 4.2 MB) Background On April 7, the White House stated, The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act. The alleged shooter in the Boulder tragedy last month appears to have used a pistol with an arm brace, which can make a firearm more stable and accurate while still being concealable.taken from, FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Initial Actions to Address the Gun Violence Public Health Epidemic Ah lawyers. 75 pages of text and not one thing said in there of value. Yet our founders manage to get it right in one sentence. A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 12:42:23 AM EDT
[#31]
I am not sure if this has been covered yet;
Has anyone found a 1913, Mlok or Keymod attachment for a calculator yet? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 1:05:19 AM EDT
[#32]
What about a brace... on a rifle?
 . .  |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 1:06:47 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am not sure if this has been covered yet; Has anyone found a 1913, Mlok or Keymod attachment for a calculator yet? It would need a mental gymnastics app on it too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 1:25:44 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Keep in mind that the ATF and the Democrats have **ZERO** interest in compliance. Absolutely none. All that they want is to drive you underground. If you never take it out and shoot it or if you can't pass it on to your kids they have effectively won. Plus now they have a nice little felony they can drop on an unsuspecting 2A supporter. If you don't do the calculus to figure out if your pistol is a SBR - or if the ATF just changes their mind like it says they can in the doc - then your are ipso facto a felon without the right to vote or exercise your 2 rights. Period. Your lack of compliance is a *feature* . . . not a bug. They are praying to whatever gods they worship that NO ONE complies. They don't have that long. There are probably some of them who intend exactly that. But the dominant scheme among the planners is more likely to be "lets force them into an Event which we can use as justification, after which we will effortlessly crush them". The actual implementation involves a great deal of drool and delusion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 1:37:14 AM EDT
[#35]
Can we get a letter from a lawyer that had a different interpretation of pistol braces ala the Dick Chaney interpretation method and be covered from criminal prosecution?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 1:50:06 AM EDT
[#36]
Hell you could ask 10 ppl to score a pistol and prob get 10 different scores. What a cluster!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 1:59:32 AM EDT
[#37]
Nothing matters now, except that their side "won" and is in complete control now. They are small in number and get to define anyone they find "imcompatible" with their way of life the enemy and kill them or imprison them.
What if the herd had guns?  Cows With Guns - The Original Animation |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 2:36:17 AM EDT
[#38]
Give the manufacturers a few weeks with these "rules" and let's see how they figure out to get around it.
I'll bet they design one with one point. Let's see |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 3:17:33 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A good portion of them that won’t know they became overnight felons tier. As they bought a factory built, for retail commercial sale pistol. Which was sporting an accessory covered by an approval letter from the agency having jurisdiction in such matters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 3:23:50 AM EDT
[#40]
I read all 16 pages of this thread, and the only thing I have to say is, don't care, won't comply.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 3:49:05 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Give the manufacturers a few weeks with these "rules" and let's see how they figure out to get around it. I'll bet they design one with one point. Let's see Considering the very first test is weight, I suppose what's old is new again. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 4:03:32 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Considering the very first test is weight, I suppose what's old is new again. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/468179/12B2FFEE-0FB1-44E1-AA3A-6B1A7314F0B6-1971305.jpg If it's under the weight range/limit, and is braced, it's automatically an SBR |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 4:15:04 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If it's under the weight range/limit, and is braced, it's automatically an SBR Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Considering the very first test is weight, I suppose what's old is new again. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/468179/12B2FFEE-0FB1-44E1-AA3A-6B1A7314F0B6-1971305.jpg If it's under the weight range/limit, and is braced, it's automatically an SBR I see that now. That worksheet is about as clear as mud. This whole thing is very Kafkaesque. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 5:28:04 AM EDT
[#44]
Let me see if I got this straightened out.
1) There is no way to pass the point system 2) In the unlikely event a person does manage to pass the point system, the ATF can determine otherwise, meaning that said person is in possession of an unregistered SBR.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 5:47:11 AM EDT
[#45]
As long as the American people continue to kick the can down the road, government will just get more ridiculous and more unconstitutional.
Peace was never an option. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 5:50:10 AM EDT
[#46]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 5:58:08 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How many points is 'Drilling another hole'? 10 and 250,000 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 6:22:52 AM EDT
[#48]
Sounds like the whole point of this is to try to turn otherwise law abiding gun owners into criminals so they can be persecuted for political reasons. Since gun owners are more likely to believe in the principles of freedom, and vote for republicans.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 6:26:33 AM EDT
[#49]
So under the proposed rule, a Glock 17 in a Roni brace would be a SBR?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2021 6:42:23 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol, no i didnt. I voted for the candidate that wasnt a racist, sexist, FIFY  |
|
|
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