Pistol Brace ruling from ATF released.

Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!

Join today!

Welcome! You have been invited by semper_fi_mike to join our community. Please click here to register.
Almost like they are offering you something for free .... is forbearance free .... or can they change their minds a few years from now. Because you still owe the price of the stamp.

Since when is anything free especially from these people, this is a trap.
 
I'm also in the wait and see category. The guy I know who transferred pistols into a trust has SBRs so his short barrels are 100% legal, and a lot of 16" uppers, so no way to play a "constructive intent" game. One item remains, an AK pistol with a brace so he may do something with that after the smoke settles. Here are the option:

https://youtu.be/ZdzClhoqTGY
 
Firemoose said:
I was really never that impressed with my pistol. I've been wanting a long scoped type anyway.

Ah, nothing like more "I'll comply" virtue signaling.

quote-each-one-hopes-that-if-he-feeds-the-crocodile-enough-the-crocodile-will-eat-him-last-winston-churchill-137-76-54.jpg




Clyde
 
Skip the first TWO minutes. It's addressing click-bait he put into a prior unrelated vid..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9euiJ4j4C0
 
Is Fuddsy Huddsy back with a new alt? Boy, I got caught out thinking Troll Tuesday had come early. What a great surprise!
 
They say what makes it a rifle are the type of optic, length of pull, surface area of the brace/receiver extension, and other things. They refuse to define what any of those things are so they cannot be complied with. They don't want the ability to comply in a way they don't like as was done with the 94 AWB.
I'm going to take a free sbr on something I was planning on doing anyways but just that one, hopefully this shit gets destroyed in the courts and preferably the nfa as a whole... this vague and capricious "redefining" of things already defined in stature needs to stop.
The non-compliance on this is going to be way more widespread than the much less widely owned bumpstocks.
 
sonofbp said:
They say what makes it a rifle are the type of optic, length of pull, surface area of the brace/receiver extension, and other things. They refuse to define what any of those things are so they cannot be complied with. They don't want the ability to comply in a way they don't like as was done with the 94 AWB.
I'm going to take a free sbr on something I was planning on doing anyways but just that one, hopefully this s*** gets destroyed in the courts and preferably the nfa as a whole... this vague and capricious "redefining" of things already defined in stature needs to stop.
The non-compliance on this is going to be way more widespread than the much less widely owned bumpstocks.


How do you know they won't say the brace has to stay, you can't put a stock on it, even if you registered it as an SBR. They'll have pictures, and it must stay in that configuration I'm betting.

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde
 
Since the ATF published the rule in the Federal Registry for the required 90-day public comment period, then literally changed the entire rule at the last minute, tells me they will do whatever they damn well please. Unless congress or the courts stop them, you can't count on anything they say, write, or even publish.

The 2 or 3 field folks, that are gun people, can't do squat because of their administration and the prevailing indoctrination of the majority of field people. Look what happened to the one good guy @ ATF for blowing the whistle on Fast & Furious. Things have only gotten worse there.
 
https://www.thv11.com/article/news/local/sheriffs-push-back-on-new-gun-regulations/91-ced46ac1-e7a4-477a-b548-adb7766cb607

Arkansas sheriffs push back on new ATF gun policy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMj134PCGrk&embeds_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thv11.com%2F&feature=emb_logo
 
Tenring said:
Almost like the rogue agency is offering you something for free .... is forbearance free .... or can they change their minds a few years from now. Because you still owe the price of the stamp.

Since when is anything free especially from these people, this is a trap.

Yup.
 
kenpoprofessor said:
sonofbp said:
They say what makes it a rifle are the type of optic, length of pull, surface area of the brace/receiver extension, and other things. They refuse to define what any of those things are so they cannot be complied with. They don't want the ability to comply in a way they don't like as was done with the 94 AWB.
I'm going to take a free sbr on something I was planning on doing anyways but just that one, hopefully this s*** gets destroyed in the courts and preferably the nfa as a whole... this vague and capricious "redefining" of things already defined in stature needs to stop.
The non-compliance on this is going to be way more widespread than the much less widely owned bumpstocks.


How do you know they won't say the brace has to stay, you can't put a stock on it, even if you registered it as an SBR. They'll have pictures, and it must stay in that configuration I'm betting.

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

Last I heard they dropped the picture requirement but it's the FATF they'll do whatever they please.
I'm in no rush to register, I'll wait and if that's how it looks I'll pay my $200 for a normal sbr and toss the brace in the trash or sell it if they still hold any value at that point.
 
sonofbp said:
Last I heard they dropped the picture requirement but it's the FATF they'll do whatever they please.
I'm in no rush to register, I'll wait and if that's how it looks I'll pay my $200 for a normal sbr and toss the brace in the trash or sell it if they still hold any value at that point.


Say no more, say no more, wink's as good as a nod to blind bat ayyyy.


EJV02WKWwAA1FQJ.jpg


Clyde
 
Back
Top