New BATF ruling on stabilizing braces today

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • 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!
  • ditcherman

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Dec 18, 2018
    7,609
    113
    In the country, hopefully.
    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.
     

    JAL

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    2,161
    113
    Indiana
    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.
     
    Last edited:

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    93   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,170
    113
    Btown Rural
    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.
     

    ditcherman

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Dec 18, 2018
    7,609
    113
    In the country, hopefully.
    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

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,688
    77
    Camby area
    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

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Nov 2, 2011
    4,798
    149
    Fort Wayne
    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.
     

    norman428

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Aug 10, 2009
    314
    18
    Noblesville
    Reading through the FAQ on their website, it sounds like there will be a tax and engraving exception if you use the manufactures markings when filing within the 120 days.

    27. ONCE THE FIREARM IS REGISTERED, AM I REQUIRED TO MARK THE FIREARM SINCE I MANUFACTURED A SHORT-BARRELED RIFLE (SBR)? • If the SBR equipped with a “stabilizing brace” is registered within the 120-day tax forbearance period, the possessor is allowed to adopt the markings on the firearm. The maker’s marking exception is only applicable to firearms that are registered pursuant to the final rule. If the firearm is a personally made firearm, the possessor must mark in accordance with 27 CFR 478.92 & 479.102 prior to submitting the E-Form 1

    This sounds like I can just use the S/N on the firearm (as it should be anyway) when filing the pistols as an SBR. Would this prevent me from removing the brace and throwing a stock on it? I would imagine a registered SRB is a registered SBR, but that last sentence makes it sound like if I change something, I "made" the firearm.

    If this is discussed somewhere already please link the thread, I did some searching but couldn't find what I was looking for. I'm wanting to get it done before the rule is reversed (assuming it will be), if it means I basically get 2 free SBR stamps. I have a 10" saint pistol and a scorpion I would love to throw a real stock on.

    Link to FAQ
     

    Cameramonkey

    www.thechosen.tv
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    35   0   0
    May 12, 2013
    31,688
    77
    Camby area
    Tagging for interest. Its an interesting point. Are we going to have SBRs and SBR*s? Because with no engraving, it sounds like it would be locked into the SBR* (always braced) category since a SBR requires engraving.

    Damn. This stuff makes my head hurt. Reminds me of my younger days dealing with psycho girlfriends that cant communicate clearly and always changes her mind.
     

    tackdriver

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 20, 2010
    481
    93
    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:


    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

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 20, 2010
    481
    93
    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.
     

    norman428

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Aug 10, 2009
    314
    18
    Noblesville
    Tagging for interest. Its an interesting point. Are we going to have SBRs and SBR*s? Because with no engraving, it sounds like it would be locked into the SBR* (always braced) category since a SBR requires engraving.

    Damn. This stuff makes my head hurt. Reminds me of my younger days dealing with psycho girlfriends that cant communicate clearly and always changes her mind.

    You would think, but they also make this point in the FAQ

    10. ONCE THE FIREARM IS REGISTERED AS A SHORT-BARRELED RIFLE (SBR) CAN I REMOVE/CHANGE THE “STABILIZING BRACE” OR ATTACH AN ITEM MARKETED AS A STOCK? IF SO, AM I REQUIRED TO NOTIFY ATF IN ADVANCE? • Yes, the firearm is registered as an SBR, and you can change out the “brace” device or stock for a different brace or stock. You do not need to contact ATF/NFA because changing the brace/stock does not change the configuration of the SBR. However, if the length of the firearm has changed you will need to notify the NFA Division.


    It only adds confusion to the entire thing. You can change it, but you cant build it? But "building" it is changing it. But this part makes no mention of if it has to be engraved or not. It might be the answer to my question, but if that's the case why require engraving at all as long as the firearm has a S/N.

    Plus what issues will you have later on if you sell it without an engraving, but as an "sbr".
     
    Top Bottom