This makes sense.

I read that in George Carlin's voice

[Bleh - I had Gold , but fuck it]

To your question.  You have 3 weeks to make a decision.  You can register it on their little website and move the fuck on, get rid of the brace (as if, anybody wants a 10.5" pistol) , our toss the 12" bbl and mount a 16 "

Or ignore it, and go underground- never to actually be used in public or (God forbid), home defense.

Disagree with your opinion on that.  

Built first as a pistol, then adding a brace, was always the smartest route.  You don’t need the brace to be functional.  And only a couple of mine came from the factory with the brace already.  My earliest ones actually had bare tubes, then came the cane tips, then came braces.  Nothing changes that, they can go back to being a basic pistol no problem.

Or do you expect ATF to go around asking people exactly how they built their weapons up when someone wants to put it back into Title 1 status?  The only ones they can prove are ones which came from the factory with a brace anyhow.  (Those OEM braced guns are the ones most likely to get someone jammed up- if they can jam people up, which I kind of doubt).

They bit off more than they can chew, but it sure does not seem like we are going to get any court relief prior to 5/31.  

The only winners are people who intended to do some future SBR paperwork anyhow.  Saved a lot on NFA stamps potentially.

Well the lawyers will be winners as well.  As always.

They actually talk about that, and hence the Fuck It they officially state on extent of investigation and enforcement.  The biggest example is they specifically say they know engravement waiver is not in compliance with the law on stripped lower (as in Anderson, not 80%) home built Units.  Technically, Anderson is NOT the SBR manufacturer, since it never left their factory in arm brace configuration.  But they don't have the resources to cross check every unit, so fuck it, everybody that has a lower with the manufacturers name and state on it - that counts as the engraving.  

Frankly, if you zip tie an armbrace to a foreign 1911, *sigh*fuckit*stamp*.  

Next

LCP with armbrace...     *sigh*fuckit*stamp*.  

You are wrong.  Because the acknowledgment says that the weapon fits their criteria.  Doesn’t say jack shit about whether it was built as a basic pistol first (no brace), then a brace was added a couple years later.  (Like many of them were, because braces were not even invented yet.)  So how the hell can anyone say a weapon that was a bare tube AR pistol for years has “always been a rifle” ?  No- it was a bare tube pistol (legal then, legal now, legal under this stupid rule), then it was a braced pistol, then ATF changed their mind and decided that at the point it got a brace it was always a rifle.

You are reading too much into it, or only considering weapons that had a brace on them from day 1.

Nope.  Even amongst LE, many are saying “fuck them”, “it was legal when I bought it”, etc.  More than I expected actually.

I am not in that crowd as I really like SBR’s, so I said “fuck you, and also- thanks for the free NFA approval” (well we shall see if they get approved).  Only a good option if you are already a tax stamp whore.  Nothing wrong with hoping they lose in court, while also taking action to save some money in the meantime.  

ATF and their hot/cold BS just gets so ridiculous.  Good fucking luck prosecuting the average person with a braced pistol in June.  Any smart prosecutor won’t touch those cases.  So it is a fairly safe position if you don’t register, but who likes being labeled as a criminal for something that was caused by ATF being wishy washy?

Will you still feel that way after Brandon says something along the lines of: "The majority of gun owners WANT registration; I mean, just look at the millions of gun owners that have already voluntarily registered their assault weapons with the AFT in just the last few months!"

When you're a useful tool for Joe and Kamala, what then?

Do you actually believe that 99.9% of the braces sold weren’t solely purchased in order to skirt the NFA?

They were designed for the disabled, however, that’s not why they became popular and you know that just as well as I do.

This is true. But like anything else with guberment rules, people will always do things to get the most benefit possible.

And if nobody registers they'll say "we still have many unregistered SBRs so we have to do something else."

Them taking the next step in screwing us is not conditional.
They will simply adjust their lie to whatever we do.

Fighting in court is the only thing that will make any difference at all and they obviously will try to ignore even that.

That's Quisling talk.

Why are you so insistent on being a Quisling and making the enemy's argument for them?

Just because you don't like what I said doesn't make it untrue.

Braces have always been an end-run around the NFA just like AR "pistols" with bare tubes for 99.9% of people.  If the NFA didn't exist neither of these things would exist except maybe a couple of braces for those that are truly disabled and need them.

I prefer to use logic rather than resort to "feelings" based arguments on topics of discussions.

They are gonna cave in and u know it..it will be just like the vaxxtards.... but my job, but my kids, but but but.

Logic?  

Hardly.



More like fear, greed and compromise at the expense of your fellow gun owner.

But they could have paid the tax and that couldn’t be used against us.

They are selling their freedom for 200 bucks.

No compliance to an unconstitutional ruling by persons that have very little in law enforcement knowledge thanks to being appointed to jobs they have no idea how to perform!

Quite frankly a lot of my "fellow gun owners" are being a bunch of whiny little bitches towards those who disagree with their opinions so that comment is hardly going to make me feel bad about my stance on the subject.

At any rate my prime motivation was that I didn't have to engrave the lowers this way which means they'll potentially have some value down the road compared to an engraved lower should I ever decide to sell them.

If this gets overturned and they come back and want the $200 for the stamp then that's fine too.  If they say that I have to get them engraved as well then I'll put braces back on them and move on with my life.

To most people's eyes - Semi-Auto's look just like full autos and are simply a NFA loop hole.

Hopefully you quislings can hold the atf's balls & shaft in your mouths for a while longer in order to keep them distracted from this.

You just made my point with this post.

When all you can do is resort to insults as a retort to differing opinions you simply push people further and further away from being on "your side".

Not sure if this has been posted in this mega thread, but this video from the Arfcom Youtube channel is well worth a watch. Rep Massie of KY put the ATF director on the spot to clarify some of the mud they've generated.

The director stated simply owning a detatched brace will not be prosecutable.

And if we all stick together in denying reality our resistance can be written off as ignorance.

This thread is another shining example of how fucked up we are as whole.  We should have 135 pages of organizing ways to fight and stop the fatf overreach but instead we have 135 pages of a disorganized clusterfuck of bickering amongst each other.

Sad.

I agree. Unfortunately, if the ATF goes more rogue and starts arresting people with unregistered factory braced pistols, like my SIG Rattler, no one on this forum will be there to bail you out of jail. You and your attorney will be fighting for your freedom alone.

The decision to register as a SBR, on these braced pistols, is a decision best made without this echo chamber IMHO. Do I agree with their new rule, fuck no! But I also don’t want to be fighting ATF alone.

Just wanting to clarify here, are you talking about eligibility for what you can register under amnesty? If so, I believe the publish date was was Jan 30th, if you didn't own it and have it in 'braced' configuration by that date, you cannot register it under the amnesty.. (if you're paying 200$ to do SBR a normal way, i don't think it matters when you own  a 'pistol'). You have until May 31st to register if you are eligible for 'amnesty'.

This is what I've been saying too. Then these are the same people that will bitch they are left standing alone.. Yeah look in the mirror sometime.

Without reading all 135 pages is it the ATF's website one would go to if someone wants to look into registering? Asking for a friend.

Sort of. They have the documents to download minus fingerprint cards and such. The BATFE also has the efile portal for electronic filing.

You can do it yourself through efile or paper file using the documents on their site, or use a 3rd party service to help you out, like Silencer Shop (for $50), to do the main paperwork for filing.

There's FAQs out there and our own NFA forum has a lot of information, regardless of the type of form or transfer you're trying to do.

The NFA is a leftist "end run" around the second amendment.

This is not a new rule or a rule change. ~ATF

No one uses these pistol braces because they want to, they’re a way around the NFA. ~ATF

$200 is a small price to pay to prove that wrong. Being on the fundraiser for suing ATF stripped lower made me happy to submit pics of the factory engravings.

What’s the compliance date again?

At the FIC they said they’re supposed to disable the pistol brace form option on 5/31/23 at 12:01 am.

Nevermind.  Asked and answered.

Someone remind me not to post until my second cup of coffee.  

There seem to be different levels of what constitutes "law" in this country (in order of supposed importance):

1-The Constitution and what it says, supposed to be the supreme law of the land and incorporated to the states themselves.

2-SCOTUS rulings that can sometimes clarify, create, or even change the meaning of what the Constitution says.

3-Federal Laws which are often at odds with one or both of the above, but are allowed to remain in place either because of rulings that use legal weaseling around the Constitution to claim that things that are plainly unconstitutional are actually ok, or until successfully challenged. Legal weaseling includes things like the justification for the Patriot Act, parallel construction, civil asset forfeiture, etc...

4-Federal LE interpretation of the aforementioned laws which can be to ignore them completely, to enforce something clearly never stated in nor intended by those laws, or even to choose 1 or 2 over the other on an inconsistent basis according to their own whims.

5-State laws which may be at odds with any of the above.

6-Local/municipal laws.


You can probably refine that somewhat, but it is always interesting to me how some members here will settle on 3-4 rather than 1 or even 2. I guess I don't understand how that is the level that is high enough for them to consider the correct version of "legal" but not low enough that it is superseded by those above that they are at odds with.

Natural law supersedes the Constitution.

Everyone agrees this “rule” is complete hogwash. It’s blatantly & undeniably unconstitutional.

However in reality, none of that will stop the government from destroying your life if they so choose.

The same as registering your pistols won’t stop the government from destroying your life if they so choose.

At the end of the day this “rule” is a symptom of a much larger problem. And all of this infighting amongst gun owners is completely counterproductive to solving that problem. No doubt BATFE & the government in general love the division it’s created & that’s what will guarantee more of these infringements. Not the number of registrations.

The government only fears one thing at this point: A united American people. So long as they can avoid that they can continue to rob us all blind & sell us all out for penny’s on the dollar. And that’s all they really care about.

So register your pistols or don’t register. At the end of the day it truly matters not. But we’d all better wake up to the reality that this is an us vs them situation real quick. Because them has their shit together & us is on borrowed time unless we get ours together real quick.

And to the feds who no doubt monitor this site; You’d better wake up to the reality that you’re nothing more than pawns to the elite the same as the rest of us. Your kids & grandkids will pay the same price ours for the destruction of liberty you’re helping to ensure.

Doesn't matter. Law says "designed and intended". Doesn't say "purchased solely to skirt the nfa".

Correct, but that's too nebulous a concept to grasp for those who derive their sense of right and wrong from what is legal and illegal.

How many firearms were added to the registry since the final ruling compared to the 90 years prior?  

You know what? Even that's a trap. Facts don't matter to anti-2A politicians.  

Make sure you say that after your conviction following a Democrat-sanctioned kangaroo court.

Attached File

But the point of all this is it doesn’t matter what they say because they can just change their mind later.

Do you actually believe that 99.9% of charitable donations weren't solely made to reduce a person's tax liability?

That should be illegal!

Following the letter of the law is still following the law, despite what you may believe.

This is you:
Attached File


Have you demanded to see anyone's Form 1 at the range yet? Have you started making a list of all the people you're going to turn in on June 1st?

I bet you have.

Your analogy is flawed as donations being tax deductible is an incentive.

I don’t care what anyone else does.

Good read
https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2023/05/09/founding-father-brace-n70299?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=fa7ed4f158455d4226a7144ea2e3cd8140f096fc4db5de6425eb15fdadf1df48

The Founding Fathers wouldn't approve of brace ban
By Tom Knighton | 8:30 PM on May 09, 2023

The ATF decided that the stabilizing braces they told people could be put on their AR-pistols and it still be a pistol are now illegal. If that makes no sense to you, welcome to the wonderful world of life with the ATF.

They can approve of a product, allow companies to sell millions of them, then decide on a whim that they’re now illegal.

Yet we now live in a world with the Bruen decision in play.

That decision basically says that if the Founding Fathers didn’t restrict it or something like it, you can’t either.

And on the issue of braces and such, well, it seems they knew about such things. From David Codrea writing at Ammoland:

In light of the Bruen decision, where “text, history, and tradition” of the Second Amendment at the time it was written is what informs us as to what the Founders understood the right to protect, I couldn’t turn to the Borchardt – that would play right into the hands of the gun prohibitionists, who, unable to identify Founding-Era infringements have tried turning to later laws, including post-Civil War edicts intended to keep freed blacks disarmed.

…

“Here ya go.  Yes, we go back to the Founding,” he followed up, attaching a complaint by parties including the State of Texas, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, and private citizen/FFL Brady Brown against ATF. “The pics start on page 70.”

“It is a massive case,” he advised.  “We are currently waiting for the judge to rule on whether or not to grant a preliminary injunction.”

He wasn’t kidding. The complaint, embedded below is a treasure trove of examples from even before the Second Amendment was written, presenting photographic examples including:

1720 Flintlock Pistol with Stock
1750 Flintlock Pistols with Stocks
1760 Flintlock Grenade Launcher
1780 Flintlock Pistol w Stock
1760-1820 Flintlock Pistol Carbine with detachable stock
1790 Flintlock Blunderbuss Pistols – w detachable stocks (and bayonets)
1795 Flintlock Blunderbuss – 15” barrel


Now, take a look at those firearms.

All of those are relevant when you look at the criteria laid out by Bruen. In fact, the earliest example provided here predated not just the nation but potentially some of the Founding Fathers themselves. These weren’t unheard of.

As a result, it seems incredible to claim that they would have favored a restriction on such braces when they did absolutely nothing about those pistols with stocks–essentially something that does what the ATF says they’re trying to prevent today–suggests that they didn’t have an issue with them.

If they did, they had plenty of time to restrict them.

So if they didn’t and if we follow the Bruen decision’s criteria, then there really are no grounds for restricting the stabilizing braces as the ATF has done.

Granted, I’d argue the only way the ATF is constitutional is if it were a privately-owned convenience store, but I get that a lot of people disagree with me on that one.

Either way, though, it seems there’s enough historic support for these braces that a court will be hard-pressed not to overturn the ATF’s regulation.

My only braced pistol now has a stock and a pined and welded 6 inch xm177 KAK muzzle device making it a rifle. The one pistol I still have never had a brace just a tube. Gonna wait and see what happens in court.

If the Republicans were really concerned with the ATF putting this policy in place with out going thru congress, they could and a line in the debt ceiling bill legalizing Arm braces.

Braces weren’t illegal to ‘skirt’ the NFA anymore than driving 54.9 or 55.1 mph when cop radar detectors only resolve to 1 mph ‘skirts’ a 55 mph speed limit.

The ATF even said braces weren’t stocks and allowed them to be sold for a decade before the scale of the market, a few high visibility murders unrelated to the functionality or even legal aspect of a brace, and a change in political administration made them arbitrarily decide a registration drive makes it all better.  To save face. To show those uppity youbube influencers.

A screw driver can function as a scraper, chisel, pry bar, wedge, shank, burglars tool, and as a screw driver. It’s obvious what it was design-optimized for (um, screws).  

Nobody designs stocks for rifles out of bifurcated, floppy, strap festooned, or with thin blade profiles. Just because a brace functions as a shitty stock doesn’t make it a stock (required for rifle under law). Just because criminals misuse a screwdriver as a shank doesn’t make it a knife.  Loophole is just a short phrase for ‘characteristic of the law’. The law needs to be changed to deal with problems, not twisted. So far the proof that braced pistols are a problem is lacking. The registration drive addresses nothing other than bureaucratic and fanboy egos.  It does perpetuate the bureaucracy.  You seem to like that.