BenderRodriguez said:

---

DBill said:

---

Nice of all of you sheep to sheep. The government appreciates it!

---

https://texags.com/forums/34/topics/3341895/

---

Only way to buy one bro!

What the hell has gotten into everyone?

AgEng06 said:

---

DBill said:

---

BenderRodriguez said:

---

DBill said:

---

Nice of all of you sheep to sheep. The government appreciates it!

---

https://texags.com/forums/34/topics/3341895/

---

Only way to buy one bro!

---

You could commit a felony and buy one illegally.

Interestingly, I believe that's the same felony you're deriding these "sheep" for trying to avoid.

---

Let the process play out. Similar to bump stocks.

Also, most of these were bought legally, being pistol braced pistols.

Well the angry inch isn't winning any deek measuring contests, but I'm okay with that.

I'm still a little unclear on what my options are going to be. I am definitely taking the wait-and-see approach for now.

I have a CZ Scorpion EVO Micro that came with a brace attached. I know at one time the rule stated foreign guns with braces had to be destroyed. Then a clarification that I could just remove the brace. Not sure if I could SBR the gun or not. While it's not my primary gun, I have dumped a lot of money into it over the years. I even have an integrated suppressor in "can jail" that cost way more than the gun itself.

Has anyone read anything specific on the foreign pistols that were sold with brace attached?

Thanks

Don't know why yall feel the need to even respond back to trolls. So easy to ignore and would not have derailed at all. Not EVERY Fudd needs a piece of your mind...

And the latest I have seen on imported stuff premade was that ATF would "allow" them to fall under the rest of the new rules . We shall see though of course. Because the ATF has never reneged on something they said ever, right??

So for us that haven't followed this.. my buddy is saying any AR type gun whose barrel is 16" or greater and 26" min length for total gun is good ? Is this correct..

AgCMT said:

---

Well the angry inch isn't winning any deek measuring contests, but I'm okay with that.

I'm still a little unclear on what my options are going to be. I am definitely taking the wait-and-see approach for now.

I have a CZ Scorpion EVO Micro that came with a brace attached. I know at one time the rule stated foreign guns with braces had to be destroyed. Then a clarification that I could just remove the brace. Not sure if I could SBR the gun or not. While it's not my primary gun, I have dumped a lot of money into it over the years. I even have an integrated suppressor in "can jail" that cost way more than the gun itself.

Has anyone read anything specific on the foreign pistols that were sold with brace attached?

Thanks

---

Should be good to replace the brace with the original end piece section that comes with the pistol.

fullback44 said:

---

So for us that haven't followed this.. my buddy is saying any AR type gun whose barrel is 16" or greater and 26" min length for total gun is good ? Is this correct..

---

Yes that is good to go because it is a standard rifle not a Short Barrel Rifle.

Something interesting I saw on Reddit, can't remember if anyone here mentioned it:

https://www.reddit.com/r/gunpolitics/comments/10bwb4z/atf_pistol_brace_rule_forbearance_and_forgiveness/

The 'free' $200 that people are rushing to save by registering is listed as a "forbearance" - In my understanding of that word it means that they could come back at any time and ask for their $200. The same way that student loans are currently in forbearance but will ostensibly need to be paid back whenever uncle Joe finally decides it is time.

What happens if in the future they raise the tax, then come back to people who registered for 'free', and say "Alright, time to pay up, that tax is now $2,000 per item"?

I also noticed this in the FAQs. Does this mean that if own an AR pistol with a brace, and it measures over 26", you don't have to go through all of this stuff?

IS THE "STABILIZING BRACE," BY ITSELF, AN ITEM THAT REQUIRES REGISTRATION UNDER NFA?


No, a "stabilizing brace" is an accessory and ATF does not regulate accessories. However, a
firearm equipped with a "stabilizing brace" may be subject to registration if it is an SBR because it
is "designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder," as
described by the amended definition of "rifle" in the Code of Federal Regulations and has a
barrel(s) of less than 16 inches or an overall length of less than 26 inches.

lp01 said:

---

I also noticed this in the FAQs. Does this mean that if own an AR pistol with a brace, and it measures over 26", you don't have to go through all of this stuff?

IS THE "STABILIZING BRACE," BY ITSELF, AN ITEM THAT REQUIRES REGISTRATION UNDER NFA?


No, a "stabilizing brace" is an accessory and ATF does not regulate accessories. However, a
firearm equipped with a "stabilizing brace" may be subject to registration if it is an SBR because it
is "designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder," as
described by the amended definition of "rifle" in the Code of Federal Regulations and has a
barrel(s) of less than 16 inches or an overall length of less than 26 inches.

---

Wouldn't either criteria make it an SBR? It says barrel of less than 16" OR an overall length of less than 26".

So a pistol that has an overall length of 26+" would still qualify, as it has s barrel of less than 16"- thus meeting one of the two OR criteria.

cupofjoe04 said:

---

lp01 said:

---

I also noticed this in the FAQs. Does this mean that if own an AR pistol with a brace, and it measures over 26", you don't have to go through all of this stuff?

IS THE "STABILIZING BRACE," BY ITSELF, AN ITEM THAT REQUIRES REGISTRATION UNDER NFA?


No, a "stabilizing brace" is an accessory and ATF does not regulate accessories. However, a
firearm equipped with a "stabilizing brace" may be subject to registration if it is an SBR because it
is "designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder," as
described by the amended definition of "rifle" in the Code of Federal Regulations and has a
barrel(s) of less than 16 inches or an overall length of less than 26 inches.

---

Wouldn't either criteria make it an SBR? It says barrel of less than 16" OR an overall length of less than 26".

So a pistol that has an overall length of 26+" would still qualify, as it has s barrel of less than 16"- thus meeting one of the two OR criteria.

---

Seems like based on that a bufferless rifle like an AK, SCAR, MCX, or similar could potentially meet that threshold with a 16" barrel or pinned and welded 13.7" or 14.5" if the receiver isn't long enough to put it at 26" with the stock removed.

You're right. Just looked up the official definition of an SBR, and it's any rifle with a barrel less than 16". That last part threw me since it mentioned less than 26". I was reading that as if it is over 26" it may not be subject to this rule.

So is it now illegal to take all of my new SBRs to a public range, over the 120 day period, while I wait to decide whether or not to register? And if one decides to register, would it be illegal to use these new SBRs while awaiting approval? Is this addressed in the rule, or open to interpretation?

Mr. Bob Harris said:

---

So is it now illegal to take all of my new SBRs to a public range, over the 120 day period, while I wait to decide whether or not to register? And if one decides to register, would it be illegal to use these new SBRs while awaiting approval? Is this addressed in the rule, or open to interpretation?

---

Did you read the q&a? Page 7 #25

So I assume that if it's lawful to posses, it's also lawful to use. That's the point I was unclear about.

Mr. Bob Harris said:

---

So I assume that if it's lawful to posses, it's also lawful to use. That's the point I was unclear about.

---

If I applied for the stamp I'd use the gun at the range.

dubi said:

---

Mr. Bob Harris said:

---

So I assume that if it's lawful to posses, it's also lawful to use. That's the point I was unclear about.

---

If I applied for the stamp I'd use the gun at the range.

---

Is this going to be a thing at the range where you just say "yeah, I applied…checks in the mail." Or do we have to show our papers to the Schutzstaffel on the line for proof? How does this actually get enforced in a meaningful way?

EForms has an option to print a PDF of your Form 1 while it is in the "submitted" status. It basically has a huge watermark "Submitted" across it. I'm assuming this would be similar to showing your Form 4 for your suppressors - either printed or available from your smartphone.

The hell is the buffer tube they are referencing? Sorry I am AR illiterate just got a pistol for fun and so it wouldnt be so long with the suppressor.

It is the tube on the back of the receiver that the recoil spring and buffer ride in.

Mr. Dubi said:

---

It is the tube on the back of the receiver that the recoil spring and buffer ride in.

---

thank you sir

I wonder if on June 1, dog shooters are gonna start hanging out at the range just to check stamps.

BenderRodriguez said:

---

dubi said:

---

Quote:

---

Is this going to be a thing at the range where you just say "yeah, I applied…checks in the mail." Or do we have to show our papers to the Schutzstaffel on the line for proof? How does this actually get enforced in a meaningful way?

---

It is not enforced.

And I doubt any range folks ask. We have SBR's and suppressors and for many years no one has asked to see those stamps.

---

Yep, Ive never once been asked.

And if a range did ask me I'd leave. No reason we should help aft enforce unconstitutional bs, and any range that wants to play junior fed isnt going to get my money.

---

Ok. That takes me back to my original thought process that since no one even knows it exists and if you bring it out they won't confirm its status….doing nothing at all seems the smart course of action. Hell, these regulations COULD reverse just as quickly as they institute them since it's mostly arbitrary anyway. I still contend that I see no logical reason to register or do anything at all in response to any rules….ever.

I know it had to be transferred at some time but those records aren't easily located. I'd take my chances. They aren't going to put together a commission to track that down when they are as bogged and inefficient as they are already. Plus, those could have been bought and sold many times over because they were legal. Sounds like a case of "I sold it" or the proverbial "boating accident" will work fine.