quote:

Originally posted by Oat_Action_Man:
If I have a braced gun (a "pistol") and I decide to register it, tax-free, during their "amnesty", I'm not actually creating a tax-free SBR, but I just get to keep the fucking brace and not actually put a stock on it? And presumably, because it's now an NFA item, I need to beg permission to take it across state lines?

No, it's a SBR. Same as any other SBR, except you just don't have to engrave your name on it or pay the $200 tax.

As a SBR, you can put a normal stock on it, along with a vertical foregrip.

You do have to follow all the usual NFA stuff pertaining to things like Form 4 transfers and travel across state lines.

Can this be done by eForm1?

Yep. They have a specific eForm 1 set up for these amnesty registrations. It's already live on the ATF's eForm site, even though the rule itself hasn't been formally published in the federal register yet. Click on the big red button on the right side here: https://eforms.atf.gov/

So, the ATF is offering an amnesty/registration at no cost. Is that correct?

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
So, the ATF is offering an amnesty/registration at no cost. Is that correct?

That’s the crux of it.

Yeah, it sounds like a bad idea.

It's ONLY a good idea if you have Braced Pistols you planned to SBR anyway, and then it's actually not a bad idea at all. If you already have NFA items, there's really NO downside because you're already in the NFA Registry anyway.

if you were going to SBR something anyway I can't see the downside. And the huge plus is you don't have to engrave it, and you can use it as an SBR right away rather than wait for your F1 (2 months?), or F4 (9 months?) to come back.

So, if you have a lower receiver that you were going to SBR, you can get the amnesty if you have a pistol brace for it but no amnesty if you intended and don't have one yet?

I wonder if SHOT will have any new innovations for all those AR-15 pistols never designed to be shouldered. My wrist-rocket was much better than a slingshot. The AR grip module can take a little abuse so why not leverage it a little and take the shoulder out of the equation.

We need more FUs to the ATF. So, I'll read this 290 page rule and see if I can take the brace off and attach a single point bungee sling for a pistol and the brace and 16" upper for a rifle. Hoping the rule of strict construction applies. I'm not really a stamp collector as they seem more illiquid down the road. A 22 suppressor would be nice, I'll get on that someday.

The NFA is racist and should be abolished. The ATF should just vanish with a finger snap.

Watching now.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
It's ONLY a good idea if you have Braced Pistols you planned to SBR anyway, and then it's actually not a bad idea at all. If you already have NFA items, there's really NO downside because you're already in the NFA Registry anyway.

Aside from the whole “shall not be infringed” thing, the biggest downside is being restricted from not transporting it across state lines without informing the ATF. I have an AK pistol with a brace that is my travel companion when I drive that I’d really like to keep in that configuration and not have any restrictions.

^^^Well, there is that, if that's something you'd typically do. Honestly that's not always an option anyway, depending on where you live. While I 'might' be able to do that in ME, it's not an option anywhere else in New England, and NOT in NY or NJ either! I'd probably have to drive 400 miles through 'enemy territory' to get to PA, before I could do that legally.

I guess another thing 'could' be that while you CAN keep a loaded 'Pistol' in your car, you can't keep a loaded SBR in you car, so that could be a downside for some as well

I live in the south so I’m free to travel with the AK pistol and brace as of right now. This ATF ruling changes that.

I see this...

quote:

The rule’s amended definition of “rifle” clarifies that the term “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a “stabilizing brace”) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided other factors, as listed in the definition, indicate the weapon is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder.

I wonder if you could design a brace that attaches to the forward handguard and then runs down the side of the receiver. Then it wouldn't be a rearward attached accessory and wouldn't meet the new definition of rifle. Right?

quote:

Originally posted by Skull Leader:
I see this...

quote:

The rule’s amended definition of “rifle” clarifies that the term “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a “stabilizing brace”) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided other factors, as listed in the definition, indicate the weapon is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder.

I wonder if you could design a brace that attaches to the forward handguard and then runs down the side of the receiver. Then it wouldn't be a rearward attached accessory and wouldn't meet the new definition of rifle. Right?

your new invention would deemed in violation of the "spirit" of the rule.

^^^^^^^ @Skull Leader, You probably could and get it approved and then two years down the road the ATF changes its' mind again. Which gets you right back to what we are all facing today, illegal or not. I truly hope this blows up in their faces but with all the vagaries of court decisions and the fact that some folks bought these with a "Wink, wink Bob's your Uncle" attitude to circumvent laws and did so with numerous video clips posted to the internet, it makes it harder to defend that it is anything but a defacto SBR. I don't like it either and wasn't one of those doing those things, but am going to be caught in the middle of this shitstorm just like everyone else. Perhaps we will get real lucky and this fiasco will precipitate an actual legal change to the NFA which is what ultimately needs to occur.

quote:

Originally posted by BB61:
So, if you have a lower receiver that you were going to SBR, you can get the amnesty if you have a pistol brace for it but no amnesty if you intended and don't have one yet?

Not sure. I think you could but this whole thing is a clusterfuck.
At one time I think they wanted a photograph of the brace. That might have changed.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Yeah, it sounds like a bad idea.

My thinking also.

Is ATF open today to do this? MLK day shut gov down normally.

Today is a federal holiday, so ATF offices won't be open.