New BATF ruling on stabilizing braces today

[edwea]

Getting my form 1 and form 4s approved would go a long way to get the queue clear.

 

[JAL]

Getting my form 1 and form 4s approved would go a long way to get the queue clear.

No free tax stamp until it's published.

 

[JAL]

You sure? It says it still comes with the brace.

https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-10-5-5-56-nato-1-7-nitride-moe-ept-shockwave-pistol-kit-black-5165449862.html

Not a complete pistol . . . no lower receiver that has to go through an FFL Dealer. My search was for complete firearms that included the lower receiver with serial number.

 

[ditcherman]

Go to the Federal Register site and look at prior years. 2019 shows BATFE and the Bump Stock Rule being published.

Not arguing with you at all about it being not published, just to be clear.

My dealer said it was the ATF that told them it had been published, or at least they intended to publish it, and because they intended then it could be enforced.
Sounds like manipulation to me.
He also said atf pushed off the meeting with dealers to explain how it all works.

I think they’re just trying to manipulate the market without opening them up to lawsuits, or defeat in court.

 

[Super Bee]

Not a complete pistol . . . no lower receiver that has to go through an FFL Dealer. My search was for complete firearms that included the lower receiver with serial number.

Gotcha, my mistake.

 

[JAL]

Gotcha, my mistake.

I didn't know they were still selling kits with braces . . . lacking only the stripped lower receiver. Now that is interesting. You need a stripped lower receiver to make it a firearm of some kind. Until then, it's a bucket of parts, unless the buyer has a lower receiver, and then you have a bucket of worms.

 

[bwframe]

Just playing devil's advocate. Why wouldn't the Feds take all the sweet time they could to publish to the register?

They loose nothing, while not having to fool with legal fighting. In the meantime, brace sales have come to a halt and owners are taking them off.

 

[Expat]

NRA is the group helping to spearhead the lawsuit.

 

[edwea]

No free tax stamp until it's published.

I paid the $200. The lower half I form 1'd is a rifle, not braced pistol.

 

[JAL]

I paid the $200. The lower half I form 1'd is a rifle, not braced pistol.

In that case I agree -- better to get it into the queue now than after the deluge hits.

 

[ditcherman]

Just playing devil's advocate. Why wouldn't the Feds take all the sweet time they could to publish to the register?

They loose nothing, while not having to fool with legal fighting. In the meantime, brace sales have come to a halt and owners are taking them off.

You? Playing devils advocate? Nah. The real bw’s accounts apparently been hacked.

But otherwise, spot on and totally agree!

 

[Cameramonkey]

Not a complete pistol . . . no lower receiver that has to go through an FFL Dealer. My search was for complete firearms that included the lower receiver with serial number.

And PSA is famous for not selling complete pistols. You usually have to buy your upper and lower separately. Even in “normal” times. It’s just how they roll.

 

[Super Bee]

I didn't know they were still selling kits with braces . . . lacking only the lower. Now that is interesting. You need a lower receiver to make it a firearm of some kind. Until then, it's a bucket of parts, unless the buyer has a lower receiver, and then you have a bucket of worms.

I actually bought a couple of those kits and they were dropped off the day the ATF announced this new "rule". I did not even unpack them, just sent them right back.

 

[tackdriver]

Once again, see Post 539.
I'm not saying you are wrong about the sociopath angle. I suspect that is evident by the "arbitrary and capricious" nature of the last several years regarding these things.

But functionally, you cant really pass a "law" with a remedy to escape penalties, if you dont already have the remedy in place.

I thought they did have this ready to go, but I'm probably mistaken. Last week, I followed the cookie crumbs and got to here:

eForms

eforms-form1.atf.gov

I didn't go past this point, as it required: 1.) creating a user account on the ATF site; and 2.) the language that I was agreeing that I did now possess a weapon that meets their requirements as a SBR. I'm not sure I do... I'll have to think on that.

Maybe if I had gone further, I would have hit a wall. Maybe the back end isn't really ready. (Remember the first healthcare.gob rollout? what a disaster.)

I think I'm going to give it a whirl, but definitely waiting until it is published and a little of the smoke clears.

 

[tackdriver]

No free tax stamp until it's published.

That's my read - and also NO EXEMPTION for possessing a "firearm" during the 120 day period, or while the application processed.

A person is only 'covered' if they file WITHIN the 120 day window, from the date of publication. It hasn't been published yet (checked 10 minutes ago), so technically, anyone proceeding right now, is not exempt or covered.

When my tin foil hat too tight, I wonder:

If there is malicious intent, and a trap, this could be it (but unlikely). Get a whole bunch of people to go online and ADMIT and agree that they possess an unregistered NFA firearm(s) "...that are: 1) equipped with a stabilizing brace; 2) meet the definition of "rifle" under federal law; and 3) have a barrel or barrels less than sixteen (16) inches in length. By proceeding with this application, you are certifying that you and the firearm you intend to register meet the tax-exempt parameters set forth in ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F." " ATF's eForms website

Then, NEVER actually publish the rule. No publish, no exemption. Then go round up the people that jumped the gun. The longer this does not get Published or withdrawn, the more fish in the net.

They sould easily make up some rationalization like "upon further review and consideration..." or "Due to the language that confuses ignorant peasants, we will be re-writing...." and never publish anything.

My hat is on secure at the moment, and I don't really think this is the plan, but it's an interesting story. I'll crap myself if this actually happens.

 

[ghitch75]

does this fall under the rule???

 

[defaultdotxbe]

That's my read - and also NO EXEMPTION for possessing a "firearm" during the 120 day period, or while the application processed.

A person is only 'covered' if they file WITHIN the 120 day window, from the date of publication. It hasn't been published yet (checked 10 minutes ago), so technically, anyone proceeding right now, is not exempt or covered.

When my tin foil hat too tight, I wonder:

If there is malicious intent, and a trap, this could be it (but unlikely). Get a whole bunch of people to go online and ADMIT and agree that they possess an unregistered NFA firearm(s) "...that are: 1) equipped with a stabilizing brace; 2) meet the definition of "rifle" under federal law; and 3) have a barrel or barrels less than sixteen (16) inches in length. By proceeding with this application, you are certifying that you and the firearm you intend to register meet the tax-exempt parameters set forth in ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F." " ATF's eForms website

Then, NEVER actually publish the rule. No publish, no exemption. Then go round up the people that jumped the gun. The longer this does not get Published or withdrawn, the more fish in the net.

They sould easily make up some rationalization like "upon further review and consideration..." or "Due to the language that confuses ignorant peasants, we will be re-writing...." and never publish anything.

My hat is on secure at the moment, and I don't really think this is the plan, but it's an interesting story. I'll crap myself if this actually happens.

No publish, no exemption, but no publish also means no SBR. The previous holding that braced pistols are still just pistols remains in force.

 

[tcecil88]

does this fall under the rule???

View attachment 250466

JMHO, but I wouldn't post any pictures and ask any "is this legal?" questions. If nothing else, we shouldn't be giving the AFT lurkers on here anymore bright ideas. I don't think bird's head type shotguns were mentioned, but it will be eventually if people start asking about it frequently. I would err on the side of caution and say these would be included as it is equipped with a brace.

 

[tcecil88]

NRA is the group helping to spearhead the lawsuit.

And we all know how the NRA spearheads things, through compromise. They absolutely should be included in the law suits, but not at the tip of the spear.

 

[ghitch75]

JMHO, but I wouldn't post any pictures and ask any "is this legal?" questions. If nothing else, we shouldn't be giving the AFT lurkers on here anymore bright ideas. I don't think bird's head type shotguns were mentioned, but it will be eventually if people start asking about it frequently. I would err on the side of caution and say these would be included as it is equipped with a brace.

not mine just seen it on the net and just was wondering.....btw the Nazi's can see it too