ATF Coming After Firearms with Stabilizing Braces

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • outrider58

    Eats Bacon Raw
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    49,963
    I feel you. It's total bs.

    Regarding your comment about removing the brace...
    What is your take on...

    A. Some people bought a pistol with a brace already attached.
    B. Some people bought a pistol with no brace attached and never put a brace on.

    Would A. need to register? My take - Yes
    Would B. need to register? My take - No

    The way I am interpreting is those who never put a brace on wont need to register because they are not considered sbr.
    Is this info valid?
    If you don't have a brace on it, it isn't illegal.
     

    alucard0822

    For great Justice
    Oct 29, 2007
    17,687
    PA
    If you don't have a brace on it, it isn't illegal.
    Another thing to note, an NFA firearm only has the travel and possession restrictions when configured as an NFA firearm. Until today, you could put a 16" barrel on, or slap a brace on an SBR and travel without a form 20. So even if you SBR a braced pistol, soon as the rule gets shut down by the courts (IMO it will), it will basically be a braced pistol again when configured that way after the rule gets smacked down.
     

    outrider58

    Eats Bacon Raw
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    49,963
    Another thing to note, an NFA firearm only has the travel and possession restrictions when configured as an NFA firearm. Until today, you could put a 16" barrel on, or slap a brace on an SBR and travel without a form 20. So even if you SBR a braced pistol, soon as the rule gets shut down by the courts (IMO it will), it will basically be a braced pistol again when configured that way after the rule gets smacked down.
    That was always a nice workaround.
     

    Stoveman

    TV Personality
    Patriot Picket
    Sep 2, 2013
    28,223
    Cuba on the Chesapeake
    FPC has filed suit to stop the shenanigans.



    1675198163545.png
     

    workshop777

    Member
    Feb 11, 2021
    34
    I keep seeing, just remove the brace, as an option. Scrolling through the published rule, it's not gonna be that easy. You are going to have to remove your sights/optics as well.

    "For instance, back-up or flip-up sights that can only be effectively used when the firearm is shouldered are an indicator that a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. Similarly, the presence of a reflex sight with flip-to the side magnifier that has limited eye relief (i.e.,the sight is unusable unless aimed and fired from the shoulder) is a design incorporated on firearms designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder."

    Based on that little blurb, they are trying to qualify red dots and flipups/backups as sights that are intended for shoulder fire...
     

    Kman

    Blah, blah, blah
    Dec 23, 2010
    11,991
    Eastern shore
    Damn. If I had an AR pistol with a brace I can't put video of me shouldering it on FB or twatter. Couldn't have range time with my ATF buddies either.
    Bummer.
     

    1841DNG

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 17, 2016
    1,143
    I keep seeing, just remove the brace, as an option. Scrolling through the published rule, it's not gonna be that easy. You are going to have to remove your sights/optics as well.



    Based on that little blurb, they are trying to qualify red dots and flipups/backups as sights that are intended for shoulder fire...
    Did not watch it myself and I certainly don't trust them but apparently the ATF said on a Q&A that red dots should be fine.
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    The way I understand it is, If bought as a pistol, you can NOT SBR it and keep it as a pistol. Just have to remove the Brace and throw it in trash or modify the brace so it can’t be reattached.

    The video is a few days old so they did not know that the rule has been officially published as of today (1/31/22).

    One of the issues that arises from the new rule is that firearms with these braces were thought to be pistols but are considered SBRs under the new rule. You cannot convert a rifle to a pistol. It appears that the ATF will overlook this conversion if it takes place before the effective date of the new rule 120 days from now.

    For those that want to SBR it under the free tax stamp may not be able to covert the firearm to a pistol after the effective date.

    Trashing or modifying the brace is certainly the most conservative option. The problem with just removing the brace is constructive intent. The brace does not need to be attached to the firearm for there to be constructive intent. You might not need to dispose of the brace if there are additional parts such that there is no longer constructive intent.
     

    Wayne1one

    gun aficionado
    Feb 13, 2011
    3,131
    Bowie, MD
    I keep seeing, just remove the brace, as an option. Scrolling through the published rule, it's not gonna be that easy. You are going to have to remove your sights/optics as well.



    Based on that little blurb, they are trying to qualify red dots and flipups/backups as sights that are intended for shoulder fire...
    That will be hard to prove with all these pistols (handguns) out here with Suppressor height sights and red dots. I don't see a difference, they wrote that with a 2010 mindset, good thing it's 2023, and handguns that are meant to fire with one hand regularly have such attachments.
     

    Wayne1one

    gun aficionado
    Feb 13, 2011
    3,131
    Bowie, MD
    Trashing or modifying the brace is certainly the most conservative option. The problem with just removing the brace is constructive intent. The brace does not need to be attached to the firearm for there to be constructive intent. You might not need to dispose of the brace if there are additional parts such that there is no longer constructive intent.
    Here is your constructive intent argument:

     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,324
    Messages
    7,277,221
    Members
    33,436
    Latest member
    DominicM

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom