Well, I really didn't think that the ATF would have the cojones to change their minds for the fourth time and ban the use of pistol arm braces...they're legal, they're not legal, they're legal, they're not legal. Anyway, now I've got to either remove the arm brace from my SIG MPX or register it with the ATF within 120 days or basically I become a felon. I like a stock on the MPX, so I've decided that I will register it, and I have gone online and set up an account with ATF eforms. At least the AG won't make me pay the $200 tax fee! Besides, once my MPX is registered as a SBR, I can legally put on a real collapsible/folding rifle stock. I know, I'm breaking the NRA's and 2A rules to fight back, but I don't care if ATF knows that I have this one firearm. With my ATF eforms account, I can also quickly register a suppressor (or suppressors) in the future. LOL, please no hate letters! Thoughts?
Who else is caught in the pistol arm brace fiasco?
- Thread starter Hawg Rider
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
There was no shortage of them for sale at the gunshow yesterday. Joe
I have an MPX SBR with a suppressor. I also have a brace on another gun. I have three tax stamps. They already know I have one as I filled out a 4473 to buy it. I enjoy telling everyone that the attached photo is my everyday carry. It is a fun shooter.
Attachments
Will they pay for the engraving as well? 
Will they pay for the engraving as well?
If memory serves, if the firearm qualifies for the amnesty and you comply with the new order, it doesn't need to be engraved. Just photo documented.
Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached "Stabilizing Braces" | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
under related resources, frequently asked questions
MARKINGS
27. ONCE THE FIREARM IS REGISTERED, AM I REQUIRED TO MARK THE FIREARM SINCE I MANUFACTURED A SHORT-BARRELED RIFLE (SBR)?
• If the SBR equipped with a "stabilizing brace" is registered within the 120-day tax forbearance period, the possessor is allowed to adopt the markings on the firearm. The maker's marking exception is only applicable to firearms that are registered pursuant to the final rule. If the firearm is a personally made firearm, the possessor must mark in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 & 479.102 prior to submitting the E-Form 1.
Last edited:
Spencerivey101
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2017
- Messages
- 87
- Reaction score
- 70
Will they pay for the engraving as well?
Pretty sure I read that you don't have to engrave anything new on these.
The ATF knowing I have one gun never really concerned me. Most of my guns have been bought on 4473s anyway. What I don't like is that I have a new form to fill out to take my LWRC SMG45 into another state. I do that at least once a year and sometimes with little notice.
Millions of Americans are potentially affected by this. They are in common use, so I expect to see challenges to this very soon. I'll wait and see what happens.
Personally, I don't own a pistol with brace, but I respect the right of others to own one. What we need is to have a few challenged shooters file suit against this rule that we believe is an overreach of ATF authority.
No Quarter
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 177
- Reaction score
- 540
I don't comply with unconstitutional actions by bureaucrats. We are already trying to survive the death by a thousand cuts in every other part of our rights. "Registration" of any sort is merely another step to assist them in reaching their ultimate agenda - which is to completely disarm the populace at some point.
Rpg
Member
I doubt that millions of Americans are affected. I suspect the actual numbers are unlikely to exceed 10% of "millions ".
While these things are popular among a small subset of firearms owners, the eco chamber of online forums makes them seem much more common than they are.
If you have one, I suggest you register it and save yourself the significant attorney fees that you'll incur defending yourself for non compliance.
I suspect the majority of firearms owners have no interest in these things. Since I'm not preparing to fight off an imaginary zombie apocalypse, I certainly have no use for one.
There will certainly be some court challenges: there always are. I wouldn't hold my breath anticipating a prompt reversal. I certainly don't want to be a test case.
Last edited:
kwill1911
Member
The Congressional Research Service puts the number much higher at somewhere between 10 and 40 million.
According to the numbers I've seen quoted, about 40 million braces are in circulation. That includes pistols sold by manufacturers (including S&W) and braces sold as aftermarket accessories.
M&P®15-22 PISTOL 8 INCH BARREL
M&P®15 PISTOL
Last edited:
STORMINORMAN
Member
Uh, how does "10 million new felons" sound to you...? Pretty good, if you are a 3rd rate shyster public defender, I bet!
Cheers!
P.S. Remember, these are the same types of bureaucrats that couldn't figure out how to identify those who didn't pay previously any federal income taxes but were (somehow?) qualified to receive $600 a week for not working...
Cheers!
P.S. Remember, these are the same types of bureaucrats that couldn't figure out how to identify those who didn't pay previously any federal income taxes but were (somehow?) qualified to receive $600 a week for not working...
Rpg
Member
The citations you provide have no information about numbers of these things in circulation. They're just Smith's advertising.
If you have actual data on the numbers in circulation, I'm happy to consider it. Without solid numbers supporting your 40 million internet fiction, I'm not going to sign up for it.
Keep in mind that the number of these things you imagine are in circulation exceeds the number of Model 10's (and their predecessors) manufactured by Smith in over 120 years. I find that unlikely on its face.
It's important to keep some perspective and not get caught up in an internet fiction repeated without citation. Repeating such nonsense doesn't assist your argument.
I would not rush out to do anything.
First, this "rule" cannot withstand even casual scruitiny by any court where suit is brought against the ATF. There are at least 2 recent SCOTUS, and one 5th Circuit case that knock it's legs right out from under it. I expect we will see several filings over the next couple of weeks that will put this on hold at the very least and likely kill it outright.
Second, the ATF doesn't have the authority to waive a tax. The whole 'free SBR' thing doesn't pass the smell test... I don't think this will go the way folks are expecting.
Finally, the ATF is simply not trustworthy. A little less than a year ago, they denied thousands of suppressor Form 1 applications because they were based on 'kits' that the ATF had previously allowed, but suddenly decided since they could be made into suppressors, they were suppressors. The next leap was to say that the 'kits' should have been transferred to the buyer on a Form 4 because they were suppressors, and you can't Form 1 something that is already an NFA item. They even rovoked some approved applications that were months and years old and demanded the suppressors be destroyed (with proof) or surrendered.
This same convoluted logic can easily be applied to the "SBR"s they've suddenly created through interpretation, and you've now declared you own if you complete a Form 1 application under the "amnesty".
I would wait and see how this goes before walking yourself out on the plank...
First, this "rule" cannot withstand even casual scruitiny by any court where suit is brought against the ATF. There are at least 2 recent SCOTUS, and one 5th Circuit case that knock it's legs right out from under it. I expect we will see several filings over the next couple of weeks that will put this on hold at the very least and likely kill it outright.
Second, the ATF doesn't have the authority to waive a tax. The whole 'free SBR' thing doesn't pass the smell test... I don't think this will go the way folks are expecting.
Finally, the ATF is simply not trustworthy. A little less than a year ago, they denied thousands of suppressor Form 1 applications because they were based on 'kits' that the ATF had previously allowed, but suddenly decided since they could be made into suppressors, they were suppressors. The next leap was to say that the 'kits' should have been transferred to the buyer on a Form 4 because they were suppressors, and you can't Form 1 something that is already an NFA item. They even rovoked some approved applications that were months and years old and demanded the suppressors be destroyed (with proof) or surrendered.
This same convoluted logic can easily be applied to the "SBR"s they've suddenly created through interpretation, and you've now declared you own if you complete a Form 1 application under the "amnesty".
I would wait and see how this goes before walking yourself out on the plank...
I think it was in 2019 that I attended the inaugural Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit at the Sig Academy. During one of the training sessions, the participants had the opportunity to try one of the Sig firearms equipped with a brace. Many of the participants that had lost use of an arm enjoyed the ability to fire an AR-type arm with the assistance of the brace. Personally, I found it a bit unwieldy. However, if the brace helps a challenged shooter get back into shooting, I will definitely support it. Sadly, there are far more challenged shooters out there than many of us are aware of!
Feel free to do a Google search... it's not very hard to find info on this.
ATF Bans Millions of Guns With New Pistol Brace Rule | The Reload
ATF estimates 3-7 million in circulation.
Industry estimates 10-40 million.
Even at the lowest estimate, it's about 6 times the normal number of annual NFA applications. No way the ATF can handle that.
Telecaster
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,790
- Reaction score
- 5,046
Yeah, let them win this one. We'll fight the next one though, just you watch. [\sarcasm].
I have no dog in this hunt other than my continued disappointment in the direction the country is headed.
I have no dog in this hunt other than my continued disappointment in the direction the country is headed.
