ATF Coming After Firearms with Stabilizing Braces

[Squaregrouper]

So what happens with the Maryland 29 inch OAL rule?

This is the first thing I thought of.
I SBR'd my AP5 in anticipation of this.

 

[teratos]

So what happens with the Maryland 29 inch OAL rule?

Permanently attached suppressors

 

[Mike OTDP]

This is the first thing I thought of.
I SBR'd my AP5 in anticipation of this.

That's my headache, too. An AR with a 10-11 inch barrel can make length. An MP5? The other option would be to glue a temporary extension to the brace...then substitute a retractable stock with extra-long bars.

There's probably a market for those, FWIW.

 

[1841DNG]

That's my headache, too. An AR with a 10-11 inch barrel can make length. An MP5? The other option would be to glue a temporary extension to the brace...then substitute a retractable stock with extra-long bars.

There's probably a market for those, FWIW.

Aren't they not fans of modifying braces and requesting photos though?

 

[dbledoc]

Hmm a 10 inch suppressor on my MPX K would be interesting.
A longer barrel on it will almost cost the same as a new one.

 

[teratos]

Hmm a 10 inch suppressor on my MPX K would be interesting.
A longer barrel on it will almost cost the same as a new one.

Suppressor volume is the biggest factor in effective suppression. We can form 1 a suppressor for it.

 

[Growler215]

Some people will be screwed, that's what'll happen.

Hopefully, one of the screwed people will get backing to challenge the MD 29" law in court. Doubt any text, history or tradition supports this provision...

The other option would be to configure a short barreled braced AR pistol with a pistol buffer tube and fixed SB mini brace, which will apparently meet the "points" requirement of the proposed ATF regulation, but otherwise kinda sucks.

 

[jcutonilli]

So what happens with the Maryland 29 inch OAL rule?

It is likely that braced pistols will need to meet the MD 29 in OAL rule. The ATF rule is not likely to be finalized until Dec with an effective date likely 60-90 days afterward.

There may be an injunction delaying its implementation.

Bianchi v Frosh also has an impact on the rule. A positive outcome in that case would mean that the restriction would no longer be a prohibition.

There are a number of things that need to be finalized before we know what actually happens.

 

[Bob A]

Can't you just remove the brace and have a perfectly legal pistol?

Can't the ATF be stopped from creating legislation through regulation? It's long past time to call a halt to this crap.

I'd go along with it for a free stamp, even though the regulation and registration sucks, but the hassle of moving an SBR across state lines is too much, to say nothing about my 300BO pistol having a 7.5" barrel, which would not make the 29" cut.

 

[jcutonilli]

Can't you just remove the brace and have a perfectly legal pistol?

Can't the ATF be stopped from creating legislation through regulation? It's long past time to call a halt to this crap.

I'd go along with it for a free stamp, even though the regulation and registration sucks, but the hassle of moving an SBR across state lines is too much, to say nothing about my 300BO pistol having a 7.5" barrel, which would not make the 29" cut.

Removing the brace will likely be an option.

The ATF can be stopped in certain circumstances. History has shown that it can be difficult because Congress has given them the power to create certain regulations.

 

[1841DNG]

Can't you just remove the brace and have a perfectly legal pistol?

Can't the ATF be stopped from creating legislation through regulation? It's long past time to call a halt to this crap.

I'd go along with it for a free stamp, even though the regulation and registration sucks, but the hassle of moving an SBR across state lines is too much, to say nothing about my 300BO pistol having a 7.5" barrel, which would not make the 29" cut.

Not for people who actually need the brace to use their tool due to some sort of physical issue.

And thanks to registration working as intended, if you bought a braced pistol legally in Maryland, they already know you have it and I assume they would be pounding on your door for an NFA violation even if you pulled it at some point.

 

[BigWilly]

My first lower is in time out. I guess I should get a couple more before December.
Does anyone know if registered as a SBR can the upper ve changed? Like can I build one pistol AR and just build each new lower and put the same upper on each one for the required photo? That way I can save up and get the specific upper I want for each lower.
Also if you can change the upper, then can you change caliber? Like one gets registered as a 5.56 but then swap to a 300 upper.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[BigWilly]

Not for people who actually need the brace to use their tool due to some sort of physical issue.

And thanks to registration working as intended, if you bought a braced pistol legally in Maryland, they already know you have it and I assume they would be pounding on your door for an NFA violation even if you pulled it at some point.

What about attaching a single point sling on the rear and shooting in a pushing motion like in the photo? Wouldn't that still qualify as a pistol?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

What about attaching a single point sling on the rear and shooting in a pushing motion like in the photo? Wouldn't that still qualify as a pistol?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

It would, but that is not remotely as stable as using a stock.

I mean brace.

*eyeroll*.

NFA is stupid. ATF is stupider, but other than a very, very, very small segment of the population, the number of people who use a brace as an actually arm brace can probably fit in an oversized bus. They are a dodge around the ridiculously stupid provisions in the NFA for SBRs. They aren't even a wink and a nudge anymore.

But the ATF is stupider, so I hope they lose.

 

[Growler215]

I find the idea of the ATF issuing 20-40 million SBR permits hilarious.

Now, it seems to me like an enterprising person could do a bit of research and create an app to generate an electronic ATF Form 5320.20 to request permission to transport specified SBRs from your house to every public shooting range in every other state in the lower 48 from 1/1/23-12/31/23. Probably a couple of thousand forms for each person, so may have to be split into separate emails, but the whole thing could be automated after you put in your info. So if a decent fraction of the new 20-40 million SBR owners did this every year, the ATF might have to review a billion individual forms every year. And some would be disapproved, e.g. for transporting a standard AR pistol to ranges in California or Boulder, Colorado, but most would have to be approved since there would be no valid reason not to.

As far as I can tell there is nothing to stop me from requesting permission to transport an SBR by car from my house to anywhere, good for an entire year.

Hell, I might find it so convenient to be preapproved to transport my SBRs to (almost) any public range anywhere in the country that I'd even pay a buck for such an app.

Of course, it occurs to me that others might be interested in having permission ahead of time for other locations, e.g. every hotel in the country. . .

 

[Occam]

I wonder if the just-issued order by federal judge Reed O’Connor (smacking down the ATF’s recent rule change treating 80% kits and the like as firearms, citing overreach beyond statute) will bear on this directly or through precedent. Hmm.

 

[jcutonilli]

I wonder if the just-issued order by federal judge Reed O’Connor (smacking down the ATF’s recent rule change treating 80% kits and the like as firearms, citing overreach beyond statute) will bear on this directly or through precedent. Hmm.

Currently the order only applies to one company. We will need to wait for the rule to be issued in order to see the impact.

 

[Occam]

Currently the order only applies to one company. We will need to wait for the rule to be issued in order to see the impact.

Understood. But the meat of the case - which the federal judge clearly thinks will go to the plaintiffs - is about the ATF going outside statutory boundaries in making sh!t up. Brings bump stocks and braces right to mind.

 

[thomfantomas]

Meow

 

[HaveBlue]

Hell, I might find it so convenient to be preapproved to transport my SBRs to (almost) any public range anywhere in the country that I'd even pay a buck for such an app.

Of course, it occurs to me that others might be interested in having permission ahead of time for other locations, e.g. every hotel in the country. . .

I only put in the interstate move request for one address in each of several states I tend to visit.

No one has ever asked to see the paperwork. Not even the TSA When I fly with them.

Adding 20 million SBRs would definitely create mountains of paperwork for the ATF year after year.