What's new
By:
Filters

Pistol brace ruling - ATF at it again

FrankenToy said:
If the ATF were to lean on that semi-local gun shop, they would know how many he ordered and how many he sold. And that's what they're after. Alibabas main advantage was only a lower price point. A local gun shop here still has them on the shelf, too, not sure what brand...
Click to expand...
I'm sure the shop would give up the info with a little pressure, but how is the ATF going to figure out which shops have been buying straight from china? The ones that were for sale here had the SB logo molded into them. I assumed they were factory seconds that couldn't go straight to SB.
 
FrankenToy said:
A local gun shop here still has them on the shelf, too, not sure what brand...
Click to expand...
SB has still been making and selling them. No issue using them on a >16" rifle

Thats where I'm curious how this will pan out, its not a brace ban, it just cannot be used on a <16" configured gun. Really not much different than the VFG on a pistol thing.
 
posford said:
SB has still been making and selling them. No issue using them on a >16" rifle

Thats where I'm curious how this will pan out, its not a brace ban, it just cannot be used on a <16" configured gun. Really not much different than the VFG on a pistol thing.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if they raid a brace company for data it will backfire as they claim not to be regulating the brace itself. They would have to go after any stock that could have been put on a illegal SBR.

Watching some of the clips from the congressional hearing with the atf director either that guy is a complete idiot or knows he's screwed and is stalling. He couldn't provide an answer on any question asked.

I'm still of the theory that this guy is the first "official" director of the ATF in a while. He's swinging his dick around trying to find something to hang his hat on for career advancement and chose to go after braces - and is now realizing he might have stuck his hand in the wrong jar. I really hope that this is painful and awkward for a couple years but ends up being the final step that gets them smacked back down to what their correct position is.
 
posford said:
SB has still been making and selling them. No issue using them on a >16" rifle

Thats where I'm curious how this will pan out, its not a brace ban, it just cannot be used on a <16" configured gun. Really not much different than the VFG on a pistol thing.
Click to expand...

Wrong. You absolutely can have vertical grips on pistols if it’s over 26 inches long. Minimum barrel length would have to be 12.5 inches.
 
Last edited:
Aisin said:
Wrong. You can have vertical grips on pistols if it’s over 26 inches long. Minimum barrel length would have to be 12.5 inches.
Click to expand...
Isn't over 26" a "firearm" not a pistol? I forget which definition led me to that.
 
Ranch Hand said:
I like the brace on this one so much I might not switch it out.


33.jpg
Click to expand...
What length barrel is this and what forend/rail?
 
RunningProblem said:
What length barrel is this and what forend/rail?
Click to expand...

It's an 8" barrel with a 1:7 twist, chambered in 300 BLK. The handguard is Isler Custom Gun Works carbon fiber. It also has a Banish 30 suppressor, Franklin Armory duplex trigger, JP silent captured recoil system, and a Reptilla short, more vertical pistol grip. It is easily the most fun gun in the AR pile to shoot.
 
kf4zht said:
Yeah, if they raid a brace company for data it will backfire as they claim not to be regulating the brace itself. They would have to go after any stock that could have been put on a illegal SBR.

Watching some of the clips from the congressional hearing with the atf director either that guy is a complete idiot or knows he's screwed and is stalling. He couldn't provide an answer on any question asked.

I'm still of the theory that this guy is the first "official" director of the ATF in a while. He's swinging his dick around trying to find something to hang his hat on for career advancement and chose to go after braces - and is now realizing he might have stuck his hand in the wrong jar. I really hope that this is painful and awkward for a couple years but ends up being the final step that gets them smacked back down to what their correct position is.
Click to expand...

Biden (‘s handlers) literally told the ATF “you have to crack down on ghost guns and braces pistols.” Shouldn’t be (isn’t) legal.

I think it’s still a ploy to get a bunch of people to “voluntarily register” their pistols. It will get shot down, everything will remain as it was, (no free SBR’s) and Bubba will talk about how he won by sticking it to the man and having it on their confiscation list.
 
Saw a video last night saying that only about 250,000 out of 30-40 million filed for the "amnesty". That's a pretty abysmal percentage.
Everyone inn the goa and fpc is now protected under several injunctions.
As I said earlier it will be interesting to see how this plays out. None of the people who filed actually got a tax stamp, because they didn't pay any tax and the atf doesn't have the authority to write law to give out an amnesty.
 
aron82 said:
Saw a video last night saying that only about 250,000 out of 30-40 million filed for the "amnesty". That's a pretty abysmal percentage.
Everyone inn the goa and fpc is now protected under several injunctions.
As I said earlier it will be interesting to see how this plays out. None of the people who filed actually got a tax stamp, because they didn't pay any tax and the atf doesn't have the authority to write law to give out an amnesty.
Click to expand...
What DO they have the authority to do?
 
aron82 said:
Saw a video last night saying that only about 250,000 out of 30-40 million filed for the "amnesty". That's a pretty abysmal percentage.
Everyone inn the goa and fpc is now protected under several injunctions.
As I said earlier it will be interesting to see how this plays out. None of the people who filed actually got a tax stamp, because they didn't pay any tax and the atf doesn't have the authority to write law to give out an amnesty.
Click to expand...

I saw similar. Massive non compliance.
 
Resolution, and eventual veto over non-law. What a fucking clown show. From Guns America.

The US House of Representatives passed a resolution to repeal President Biden’s pistol brace ban yesterday. In a tight vote, the House, led by Republican representatives, passed the resolution 219-210.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) spearheaded the repeal effort. On Tuesday, he criticized the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) for trying to “make felons out of millions of Americans.” He also accused the Biden administration of attacking Second Amendment rights.


Scalise referenced Biden’s backdoor methods. He suggested these were attempts to criminalize law-abiding gun owners, including military veterans.

“We’ve seen – from the very beginning – [President] Biden wants to take away gun rights of law-abiding citizens. He’s tried it multiple different ways, but coming through the backdoor – trying to retroactively make felons out of people, including military veterans who lost limbs fighting for our freedoms – is shameful, and we’re standing up against that,” he said.

The resolution now faces an uphill battle in the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) already voiced his opposition. He called the resolution “awful” and stated it allows people to conceal what he called “an assault weapon.”

SEE ALSO: HK VP9-B 9mm Pistol Review​

The Biden Administration responded with a vow to veto the resolution, stressing their priority is the safety of the American people.

“This Administration has no higher priority than keeping the American people safe, which is jeopardized with a vote in support of a resolution that makes it easier for mass shooters to obtain these deadly weapons,” the White House said in a statement.

The pistol brace ban, originally enacted as ATF final rule 2021R-08F, amended ATF’s “regulations to clarify when a rifle is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.” It affected firearms equipped with stabilizing braces and other attachments.

However, the rule exempts braces designed for individuals with disabilities. Options to comply with the ban included registering it by the deadline per the National Firearms Act, attaching longer barrels, removing the brace and discarding it or permanently altering it, turning in the firearm to the ATF, or destroying the firearm.

The deadline to comply was May 31, 2023. Violators may now face felony charges and the permanent loss of 2A rights as possession of a short-barreled rifle without a tax stamp is prohibited under federal law.

The House’s repeal resolution has now set the stage for a showdown in the Senate. The oral argument for Mock v. Garland, a lawsuit challenging the new rule is also scheduled for June 29th.

Stay tuned for updates.
Click to expand...
 
Next they will tell everyone with a conditional approval they're fully approved because of an accident.....oh wait this is the government.
 
Roc Doc said:
Resolution, and eventual veto over non-law. What a fucking clown show. From Guns America.
Click to expand...

It's all self pleasure.

"Sets up a showdown in the Senate". ????

Doesn't matter with Bidens handlers in the White House. DOA. Oh well, I guess if they're playing patty cake on this issue it's less a chance they're trying to screw us somewhere else
 
RunningProblem said:
Next they will tell everyone with a conditional approval they're fully approved because of an accident.....oh wait this is the government.
Click to expand...

No matter what, that's the ONLY thing that won't happen.

I don't know if I posted it here but my theory is for maximum screwing of the public, is Congress is going to pass a bill that says ATF can't give a tax forbearance because Congress gets to tax solely and they make people with conditionals pay the tax or surrender the conditional.
 
NAGR said:
We lost this battle, but the war is far from over.

The U.S. Senate just voted to kill H.J. Res 44 by a vote of 50-49.

And while we managed to keep every Republican Senator in line, zero Democrats were willing to oppose the Biden Brace Ban.

Although this is a frustrating moment, trust me when I say this fight served its purpose.

First, because of our victory in the House thanks to pro-gun Republicans like Rep. Andrew Clyde, Rep. Thomas Massie, and Rep. Chip Roy, we now have an avenue to DEFUND Biden’s ban on pistol braces when the House votes on the Federal budget later this year.

And second, we got an important roll call vote on YOUR gun rights.

And you better believe come election season, we will be reminding pro-gun voters which lawmakers sold them out to Biden and the gun control lobby.

Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Jon Tester (D-MT) both represent strongly pro-gun states, and they are both up for reelection next year.

On election day, Manchin and Tester will have to face the voters and answer for their betrayals.

Just as importantly, our bi-partisan victory in the House proved that the Biden-Brace Ban would have failed if the gun grabbers tried to pass it legally through the legislative process as mandated by the Constitution.

And there is no doubt our critical House victory will be invaluable evidence in our upcoming legal battles to snuff out this unconstitutional gun ban once and for all.

We’re in the midst of SUING the ATF and gun owners are currently WINNING on this in court. At least 5 lawsuits have been filed so far, 4 of which have limited injunctions against Biden’s ATF, essentially suspending the rule’s enforcement.

While this vote appears to be a setback, pro-gun American should hold its head high and be encouraged, because the fight is not over and we are still winning.
Click to expand...
 
Would have been nice to get it past the senate but it would have been vetoed by Biden and we dont have the votes to override it.
 
Lee said:
3o7abA4a0QCXtSxGN2.gif


www.firearmspolicy.org

FPC AND FPCAF WIN: Fifth Circuit Rules that ATF Pistol Brace Rule is Likely Illegal

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) announced that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in Mock v. Garland, finding that FPC and FPCAF are likely to win on the merits of their lawsuit challenging ATF’s pistol brace rule.
www.firearmspolicy.org www.firearmspolicy.org
Click to expand...
I mean.... I guess it is a step in the right direction, but.... make some definitive declaration other than 'likely':homer:
 
Part of what the 5th court told them was the ATF didn’t allow public comment for long enough. They also didn’t follow the ‘logical outgrowth’ from their proposed rule to their final rule.


The courts are handing the ATF the review of their work they needed. ‘You’re missing this, this, sign here, this has to be corrected, and here’ so they can get it right the second time they want to ban a firearm part by using the ATF instead of Congress.

law.justia.com

Mock v. Garland, No. 23-10319 (5th Cir. 2023)

The National Firearms Act of 1934 (“NFA”) and the Gun Control Act of 1968 (“GCA”) are two of the primary means of federal arms regulation and licensure T.he statutes impose heightened and at times, onerous requirements on manufacturing, selling, and transferring certain firearms, including...
law.justia.com law.justia.com
 
Last edited:
RunningProblem said:
Part of what the 5th court told them was the ATF didn’t allow public comment for long enough. They also didn’t follow the ‘logical outgrowth’ from their proposed rule to their final rule.


The courts are handing the ATF the review of their work they needed. ‘You’re missing this, this, sign here, this has to be corrected, and here’ so they can get it right the second time they want to ban a firearm part by using the ATF instead of Congress.

law.justia.com

Mock v. Garland, No. 23-10319 (5th Cir. 2023)

The National Firearms Act of 1934 (“NFA”) and the Gun Control Act of 1968 (“GCA”) are two of the primary means of federal arms regulation and licensure T.he statutes impose heightened and at times, onerous requirements on manufacturing, selling, and transferring certain firearms, including...
law.justia.com law.justia.com
Click to expand...
the truly sad part is all the people bowing down to this. The brace is not a regulated firearm part and the ATF can't regulate it. They're just going to create a new interpretation and people will follow it blindly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh