JUST IN! Nation WIDE injunction on the Pistol Brace Rule!

[TeamPB]

The .22 Tippmans

After 10 years of legality I purchased the 12 inch M4-22 at my LGS. It was hoot to shoot! Then Boulder did their second AR ban, which has since been withdrawn, but before it was supposed to go into effect I bought the Bugout that was in the LGS's display case and I like to help when I can. The Bugout has a folding brace and 6.5 in barrel. It is close to amazing out to 100 yards and fits in my range bag!

So last May the braces left my possession and property. They are back as of today and I really don't feel like a felon, yet.

 

[CH4]

If you registered it as an SBR, you can put a real stock on it. Doing that means it's no longer a pistol, can't be carried with a CPL and you can't take it across State lines without ATF approval.

Since the ATF ruling is stayed, brace equipped pistols are no longer considered an NFA item (for now).

Conversely, since the ATF ruling is stayed, all the new SBRs are illegal because the tax stamp is/was conditional to the ATF rule being in effect. No rule, no tax stamp. Again, you have folks trying to do the right thing by listening to the ATF that are now felons.

 

[Glenn R. McMannly]

Very nice stayed ruling.

The ruling is stayed guys, stayed nicely.

 

[CZU]

Conversely, since the ATF ruling is stayed, all the new SBRs are illegal because the tax stamp is/was conditional to the ATF rule being in effect. No rule, no tax stamp. Again, you have folks trying to do the right thing by listening to the ATF that are now felons.

I thought that the atf didn't actually issue tax stamps under the rule, all you got was a letter.

 

[Well Armed]

Conversely, since the ATF ruling is stayed, all the new SBRs are illegal because the tax stamp is/was conditional to the ATF rule being in effect. No rule, no tax stamp. Again, you have folks trying to do the right thing by listening to the ATF that are now felons.

Umm no!. The approvals are still valid. Attorney General Merrick Garland suspended the tax at the time of the Form 1 applications were submitted. The rule was in effect at the time of the submission and application were later approved. There is no automatic trigger that retroactively unapproves approved SBRs and makes felons out of everyone. Furthermore, the collection of the $200 tax ONLY was conditional on the rule and NOT the approval of the applications. If anything, the Attorney General Merrick Garland could try to collect the tax owed or he may not. I'm not sure of the case law on whether he can do so or not.

In any event, the case is still working its way through the court system, and probably will be for anther year or two before it's finalized. The injunction may or may not be overturned within that time frame. We don't know how it will all play out once the dust is settled.

The approvals weren't

 

[Well Armed]

Makes me wonder where that leaves the ones who got a stamp under the new rule? Say you had a braced pistol, then got the stamp and put a stock on the pistol to make it a sbr. Then there is a temporary injunction against the rule. Now the rule has been suspended, would the stock need to be replaced by the original brace?

No, you have a registered SBR and you can keep the stock on it. You can also put the brace back on it if you want it to be considered a pistol. You have the option to legally switch back and forth.

 

[Well Armed]

I know you can make an AR pistol into a rifle, but read you can't make a AR rifle into a pistol, unless you stamp it.

From ATF's website.

"Can I lawfully make a rifle into a pistol without registering that firearm?

No. A firearm that was originally a rifle would be classified as a "weapon made from a rifle" if it has either a barrel less than 16 inches in length or an overall length of less than 26 inches. If an individual wishes to make an NFA firearm, they must first submit ATF Form 1 (Application to Make and Register a Firearm), pay a $200.00 making tax, and receive approval of the application from ATF before converting the firearm.

[18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3); 26 U.S.C. § 5845(a)(3)-(4)]"

I had 2 SBR AR's before all this happened, I also had a braced 7" AR that I did the no tax stamp on. I wanted to keep it as a pistol for road trips...truck gun.

I guess I'd have to buy another AR pistol lower if the brace law goes out.

Still have my brace.

You can change a SBR'd pistol that started it's life as a pistol back to a pistol by simply removing the stock.

• A SBR sold from the factory as a SBR can never be a pistol.
• A stripped lower that has never been a pistol or rifle that's first configured into either a rifle or SBR can never be a pistol.
• If you SBR a pistol that started it's life as a pistol, you can change it back from a SBR to a pistol.
• When what started out as a pistol is turned into a rifle via 16" barrel, you are the "maker" of the rifle. The only difference between a pistol that was "made" into a rifle vs a SBR is that the SBR must be registered per law.

FYI: If you had two tax stamped SBRs that were pistols before you SBR'd them that you want to travel with as pistols, you can simply take off the stock and put a brace on them to turn it back into a pistol. The NFA laws and the ATF regulations only apply when your registered SBR is in a SBR configuration. If you put a 16" barrel on them to make them a long barrel rifle OR you turn them back into a pistol by taking off the stock, the NFA laws no longer apply even if it's registered. You only have to notify the ATF if you plan on leaving your state with a registered SBR that is in a SBR configuration, and NOT if your registered SBR is in 16" rifle or in a pistol configuration.

 

[LoadedRound]

PSA is sending emails advertising braced pistols.

They believe it's for real

 

[Racer X]

It's the leaving the state BS with a SBR that lead a lot of people to go the braced pistol route.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Anyone read about this thing called prohibition? A constitutional amendment to ban the sale and possession of alcoholic beverages. Alcohol was perfectly legal before 1920, yet congress banned it from 1920 to 1933, so don't delude yourselves into thinking that lawful possession by millions today prevents a prohibition tomorrow. Would it be a mistake for the government to do such a thing? Yes, but humans have a habit of forgetting history and its mistakes and end up repeating the mistakes.

1. Owning/possessing/drinking/selling alcohol is not enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Congress itself did not ban alcohol, another error - Congress might have written that amendment but it took a two-thirds majority of state legislatures to ratify it.

2. A Constitutional amendment banning something that was in common existence is a far cry from an administrative agency's rule-making. You cannot conflate a Constitutional amendment with an agency's rule on a subject.

Heaven help us if we ever have a Constitutional convention where everything is on the table.

But there have been thousands of proposed amendments and only 27 have been adopted and, if we think about the BofR as literally a part of the original 1787 Constitution, then in 235 years there have only been 17 amendments and the 18th Amendment/Prohibition was repealed by the 21st Amendment because it was so overwhelmingly unpopular, never mind stupid on its face.

Jus' sayin'.....let's not confuse these issues.........

 

[stansdds]

1. Owning/possessing/drinking/selling alcohol is not enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Congress itself did not ban alcohol, another error - Congress might have written that amendment but it took a two-thirds majority of state legislatures to ratify it.

2. A Constitutional amendment banning something that was in common existence is a far cry from an administrative agency's rule-making. You cannot conflate a Constitutional amendment with an agency's rule on a subject.

Heaven help us if we ever have a Constitutional convention where everything is on the table.

But there have been thousands of proposed amendments and only 27 have been adopted and, if we think about the BofR as literally a part of the original 1787 Constitution, then in 235 years there have only been 17 amendments and the 18th Amendment/Prohibition was repealed by the 21st Amendment because it was so overwhelmingly unpopular, never mind stupid on its face.

Jus' sayin'.....let's not confuse these issues.........

That's what I was getting at. What if, at some point, the constitution is amended to prohibit something that is in common use? It did happen with alcohol, so I would not say that it is impossible with anything firearms related.

 

[CZU]

That 2/3rds thing gets in the way of that but if it DID happen there is going to be bigger things that we should have already been worrying about.

 

[stansdds]

That 2/3rds thing gets in the way of that but if it DID happen there is going to be bigger things that we should have already been worrying about.

Oh, I agree.

 

[ladder13]

PSA is sending emails advertising braced pistols.

They believe it's for real

I've seen a few others doing the same. I hope they cleaned the dust off first.

 

[LostintheOzone]

But in common use was not the only reason for setting it aside. The changes to the final rule from the preliminary one seem to be the other reason. "logical outgrowth"

Change it back to placate the present administration. It's one or the other. Choose one. Apparently they chose the wrong final rule this time.

 

[LostintheOzone]

I was curious about this too.
If you have the brace on, it's a legal pistol. What do you do with the tax stamp? I guess you could put a solid stock on it.
At any rate, mission accomplished. They have a few of them registered, anyway.

They have a few of them registered, anyway

That was the main problem as I saw it. People trying to do the right thing and end up in a federal database somewhere.

I don't own an SBR or AR so no skin in the game, but I know many people just opted out of getting a stamp.

 

[SmithNut]

OK, so here's the question....

First I'm not a Lawyer, nor did I ever play one on TV.
This thread sounds like the whole pistol brace fiasco is dead, hurray...
So, what does it mean? I'd guess that less than 1% of the pistol braces are in use by a one armed individual....
Having said that, and we know there's been several "you can, nor you can't" shoulder a pistol braced AR, so is that still illegal, or is that the gist of this discussion, that one can shoot a pistol braced AR (or other semi-auto) when shouldering the firearm??
If I missed this in all the posts so far, my apologies, just trying to understand the what have you's and all.

In looking at Palmetto's sales of a pistol with brace it reads:

These braced pistols are designed and intended only for use as forearm braces to provide a more stable firearm platform. They are neither designed nor intended to be fired from the shoulder. As configuration changes may alter the classification of a particular firearm, the user bears sole responsibility for determining the correct application of state and federal law

Sooo, just curious as to what this means in real terms....

 

[steelslaver]

Anyone read about this thing called prohibition? A constitutional amendment to ban the sale and possession of alcoholic beverages. Alcohol was perfectly legal before 1920, yet congress banned it from 1920 to 1933, so don't delude yourselves into thinking that lawful possession by millions today prevents a prohibition tomorrow. Would it be a mistake for the government to do such a thing? Yes, but humans have a habit of forgetting history and its mistakes and end up repeating the mistakes.

HUGE difference between the brace ban and prohibition. First of all after congress passed prohibition then it had to get ratified by 3/4 of the states. The brace ban was simply made up by a agency. Wasn't even a vote in congress.

In theory they could pass and get ratified an amendment prohibiting the private ownership of guns.

BUT it takes a whole lot of people besides congress to amendment the constitution.

 

[riverrat38]

And, other than making speeches, the POTUS isn't involved in the amendment process.
It only takes 13 States to kill an amendment.

73,
Rick

 

[s&wchad]

This thread sounds like the whole pistol brace fiasco is dead, hurray...

So, what does it mean? I'd guess that less than 1% of the pistol braces are in use by a one armed individual....
Having said that, and we know there's been several "you can, nor you can't" shoulder a pistol braced AR, so is that still illegal, or is that the gist of this discussion, that one can shoot a pistol braced AR (or other semi-auto) when shouldering the firearm??

The ATF ruling isn't dead yet, but it has been read the last rights.

This article lists the ATF flips and flops concerning pistol braces. Note the 2015 and 2017 rulings.

Can You Shoulder an AR Pistol? - Brace Legality Status & ATF "Rules" - 80 Percent Arms

 

[steelslaver]

And, other than making speeches, the POTUS isn't involved in the amendment process.
It only takes 13 States to kill an amendment.

73,
Rick

But, never underestimate the stupidity of people in large groups. Like mentioned prohibition did mange to pass despite the fact that the majority liked a sip now and again and did so. Plus, as a country we didn't learn anything from prohibition. Next up was making basic drugs against the law, then declaring war on them. We tied up our court systems, filled our prisons, made lots of gangs and criminal organizations tons of money, caused turf wars that make Capone and his boys look like pikers, it has financed 3rd world cartels that corrupted lots of governments and murdered thousands. Heck even big pharmaceutical companies figured out how to cash in and added to the addicted population. After 50 years there are way more drugs, way more drug crime, designer drugs, all way more powerful than what we tried to stop. Plus, now you can get near any kind of drug in any corner of America day or night.

Yup, we learned so much from the prohibition of alcohol that when we went to war on drugs it was a far worse disaster.

 

[moonsterman]

I realize I am old and out of touch , and I am asking in all seriousness , but I dont understand this whole thing.....if you want a brace for a handgun is that not called a rifle??

 

[Duckford]

I realize I am old and out of touch , and I am asking in all seriousness , but I dont understand this whole thing.....if you want a brace for a handgun is that not called a rifle??

The ATF said so. For 10 years they rubber stamped pistol braces as acceptable accessories and said they did not make a pistol a short barreled rifle. And if we can't trust the ATF, who can we trust?

 

[s&wchad]

I realize I am old and out of touch , and I am asking in all seriousness , but I dont understand this whole thing.....if you want a brace for a handgun is that not called a rifle??

A Shockwave or Tac-14 isn't a short barreled shotgun, because laws are written in a specific way and the words have meaning. When the ATF gives something their blessing and allows millions of them to be sold over a long period of time, the items fall under the category of "common use" and can't just be banned later under an administrative decision.

A number of laws stood for decades and were later ruled unconstitutional. Short barreled rifles/shotguns and suppressors should be protected under the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Well Armed]

I realize I am old and out of touch , and I am asking in all seriousness , but I dont understand this whole thing.....if you want a brace for a handgun is that not called a rifle??

No, putting a brace on a pistol doesn't transform it into a rifle. Why, you might ask? It's very simple. Congress clearly defined in plan text what a rifle is, and a braced pistol does NOT fit that description. The ATF and Biden decided to unilaterally change Congess' definition of a rifle so that it included brace pistols. The unelected regulation branch of government does not have the constitutional power to rewrite/amend the law. It doesn't matter what the ATF gives or gives their blessing on, but rather what the legislative branch gave their blessing on.

 

[ladder13]

I'm seeing more and more braced pistols and braced lowers advertised for sale on the net.

 

[stansdds]

I'm seeing more and more braced pistols and braced lowers advertised for sale on the net.

Likely people looking to offload them out of fear they will become illegal and either have to register them (possibly pay a fee) or turn them in.

 

[Racer X]

probably because of the injunctions, and the likelihood the rule gets tossed for good.

 

[wood714]

I was at my local FFL picking up something I'd ordered. He told me the ATF lost and the pistol brace ruling was dead.

I searched online, but couldn't find anything concrete about it.

If it's dead, I'm gonna put the brace back on my AR, and remove it from the registry.

 

[Super Trucker]

I realize I am old and out of touch , and I am asking in all seriousness , but I dont understand this whole thing.....if you want a brace for a handgun is that not called a rifle??

A brace, used as a brace is not a rifle.

The original "brace" wrapped around your forearm between the wrist and elbow allowing you to shoot one handed.

The ATF said shouldering said brace was Ok until, dummy's on social media doing dummy things caused the antigunners to go on a mission.