AFT pistol stabilizing brace rule just came down.

That's what I did.

03hemi said:
Disassembly seems the best route until this whole mess gets blown out of the water by the defining courts coming into play with half the nation's states and congress suing.
Click to expand...

I bought a complete AR pistol years ago. I removed the upper, removed the barrel and stored the barrel in a different location from the lower or any lower. Hopefully this tyrannical activity will blow over in a few months and we can get back to MERICA!
AA
 
Rodan said:
This was an 'amnesty' braced pistol e-file?

If so, was there a tax stamp on the approval? It has been reported on other forums that amnesty form 1s that have been approved do not have tax stamps like a typical form 1 approval.

Not drawing conclusions to the ramifications at this point, just curious...
Click to expand...
My son got his Form 1 approved Thursday (I submitted mine two days before and nothing from ATF) and the form does NOT have a tax stamp affixed.

The Form 1 was revised in December of 2022 to include/add the below:

"Tax Exempt. Firearm is not subject to the making
tax pursuant to Title 26 U.S.C. §§ 7801, 7805. To confirm
the application qualifies for tax-free registration, ATF
may require additional supporting documentation,
such as photographs of the firearm to be registered"

It has a check box beside it and on my son's this was checked.
 
Something I'm wondering about is the wording on this one. I've done 7 form 1's in the past, but this had me puzzled enough to call the ATF to see what it meant. I asked the lady if it was a true SBR form 1 that I could put a stock or anything I wanted on. She said yes, and they only added that because of all the many pages of rules that were involved with the brace/SBR case.

I highlighted the added wording on this form 1.

i-xc2kD2S-X3.jpg


i-Dtjj3pX-X3.jpg
 
Rodan said:
This was an 'amnesty' braced pistol e-file?

If so, was there a tax stamp on the approval? It has been reported on other forums that amnesty form 1s that have been approved do not have tax stamps like a typical form 1 approval.

Not drawing conclusions to the ramifications at this point, just curious...
Click to expand...

Yes, amnesty form.

No tax stamp as no tax was paid.
 
Another major suit filed... State of Texas, GOA, et al v. ATF... requests nationwide injunction to halt implementation.

Complaint Pleading

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFH_FmFDyhA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFH_FmFDyhA[/ame]
 
sigp220.45 said:
Its not.

Stocks on handguns have been illegal (without government approval) since before I was born. And I'm old.

Pistol braces are stocks. The work-around worked for a while. It doesn't anymore.

If you want pistol stocks to be legal, work on that.

I will now launch myself onto many ignore lists: I don't care about the ATF deciding pistol stocks are masquerading as arm braces.
Click to expand...


What is the goal of the government in this? If the goal is to make guns/society safer, why ban pistol stocks or arm braces? Shouldn't one be able to fire a pistol more accurately with a stock/brace? And wouldn't that be safer? If a pistol can be fired more accurately, would it not reduce the incidence of collateral damage and/or injury to innocent bystanders?
 
otis24 said:
What is the goal of the government in this? If the goal is to make guns/society safer, why ban pistol stocks or arm braces? Shouldn't one be able to fire a pistol more accurately with a stock/brace? And wouldn't that be safer? If a pistol can be fired more accurately, would it not reduce the incidence of collateral damage and/or injury to innocent bystanders?
Click to expand...

Please quit with this rational stuff. They know way more than you.
It's just "because."
Now pay your taxes, peasant.
 
Extra spring!?!

Ten years or so ago I knew the pistol stabilizing brace was a sketchy legal work around. Years passed and the braced AR became very, very common. One day several years ago my LGS got a Tippmann M4 Micro-Elite .22 "pistol" in. It looked like it would be an inexpensive range toy, it turned out to be a great little firearm. A little over a year ago my LGS got a Tippmann Bug Out in and it too came home with me. It can fit in my range bag and it is actually accurate out to 100 yards, it was too much fun!

Both of my Tippmann's are now compliant. The Bug Out no longer has a brace and the M4 has a smooth buffer tube. BUT...

When I removed the M4's buffer tube its bolt carrier slid out and low and behold this extra (?) spring appeared on my work table. An AR buffer tube doesn't need this? It doesn't seem to be part of the bolt carrier, or its sights, or its forward assist or if it belongs to the M4 at all!

Well now I'm compliant, but not sure if I'm fully operational, until the next range visit. :eek: Help?
 

Attachments

  • spring.jpg
    spring.jpg
    97.4 KB · Views: 35
Watched a lot of the hearing yesterday RE: braces. What a circus. 90% of the time, they were not even talking about braces but general gun control, appeal to emotion fallacy with a ton of "what about the children" tossed in for good measure. Chair had to toss some protesters. ATF wasn't even present...
 
DesertFox said:
Watched a lot of the hearing yesterday RE: braces. What a circus. 90% of the time, they were not even talking about braces but general gun control, appeal to emotion fallacy with a ton of "what about the children" tossed in for good measure. Chair had to toss some protesters. ATF wasn't even present...
Click to expand...

Who was there for the defense? Just some babling lawyers, it sound like. Do it for the children is their justification? Only 2 cases of a brace-equiped firearm used in the commision of a crime. 2 out of 10-40 million?
 
Racer X said:
Who was there for the defense? Just some babling lawyers, it sound like. Do it for the children is their justification? Only 2 cases of a brace-equiped firearm used in the commision of a crime. 2 out of 10-40 million?
Click to expand...

Two shootings and about 100 requests nationwide for traces on other braced pistols potentially involved in a crime . . .
 
After Bruen "Do it for the children" isn't a legit legal reason. Someone needs to remind them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

demkofour
  • Sticky
The History of Smith & Wesson Part 1
Replies
2
Views
1K
robvious
robvious
Ματθιας
US Navy F-4 Phantom Blue Angels B-roll
Replies
3
Views
424
YeshuaIsa53
YeshuaIsa53
Mule Packer
Arming teachers and guardians in Utah schools.
Replies
10
Views
657
Bald1
Bald1
B
Dangerous Idiots Fastest Truck & Heavy Equipment Fails
Replies
3
Views
1K
tlawler
tlawler
S
Just Ordered Another S&W Revolver - M19 Classic
Replies
9
Views
725
SWFan27
S

Latest posts

Back
Top