SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    ATF proposing to ban/restrict pistol “braces.” Very short comment period: Please get involved.
Page 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
ATF proposing to ban/restrict pistol “braces.” Very short comment period: Please get involved. Login/Join 
Down the Rabbit Hole
Picture of Jupiter
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Flash-LB:
Here's an interesting article by Paul Howe, retired Delta force Master Sargent regarding door to door confiscation and things along those lines.

He was involved in the Special Operations rescue at Mogadishu which was part of the story of the movie Blackhawk Down.

https://soldiersystems.net/201...inkers-by-paul-howe/


Thanks for posting.

If we ever get to a point where people are told to turn in their guns, the most likely scenario would be some high profile arrests designed to frighten people into complying. Door to door confiscation would not go very well for those kicking in the doors.


Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
-- George Orwell

 
Posts: 4531 | Location: North Mississippi | Registered: August 09, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Frangas non Flectes
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
So is this bullshit published to the federal registry or whatever now, or not?


Guys, did this clock start ticking, or what?


______________________________________________
I believe in the 25th amendment.
 
Posts: 15481 | Location: Gilbert, AZ | Registered: February 10, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SigSentry
posted Hide Post
^ I keep refreshing. Not yet.

https://www.federalregister.go...+Braces&order=newest

Dana haz questions.



 
Posts: 2990 | Registered: May 30, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Told cops where to go for over 29 years…
Picture of 911Boss
posted Hide Post
So if Brandon keeps pointing out that AR’s are useless for overthrowing the government and that those ebil right-wingers would need F-15’s

AND….

The Supreme Court recognizes the founders intent and historical limitations of the 2nd Amendment…

Do Brandon’s boneheaded comments become a legal argument for private ownership of military grade aircraft and crew served weapons?


Asking for a friend Big Grin






What part of "...Shall not be infringed" don't you understand???


 
Posts: 10523 | Location: Western WA state for just a few more years... | Registered: February 17, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
They're after my Lucky Charms!
Picture of IrishWind
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 911Boss:
So if Brandon keeps pointing out that AR’s are useless for overthrowing the government and that those ebil right-wingers would need F-15’s

AND….

The Supreme Court recognizes the founders intent and historical limitations of the 2nd Amendment…

Do Brandon’s boneheaded comments become a legal argument for private ownership of military grade aircraft and crew served weapons?


Asking for a friend Big Grin


One better:
Liberals say our nation was a thread away from being destroyed on 06 Jan 2021. And yet the only people with guns at the capital were the capital police....
And Brandon and the DNC says AR-15s useless against the government because the government has nukes and fighter planes.
So was Jan 6 really the greatest threat to the US Government since the Civil War or not Brandon?

And private ownership of tanks, fighter planes, and artillery is allowed. Just a lot of red tape to clear to get. And inventory is low, so prices of those out there are high.


Lord, your ocean is so very large and my divos are so very f****d-up
Dirt Sailors Unite!
 
Posts: 24847 | Location: NoVa | Registered: May 06, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
quarter MOA visionary
Picture of smschulz
posted Hide Post
More tyranny exposed with the brace rule.
No hyperbole here just pure terror in action.

 
Posts: 21256 | Location: Houston, TX | Registered: June 11, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Wait, what?
Picture of gearhounds
posted Hide Post
This whole thing was bullshit from the start and just a warmup for the endgame- full confiscation of scary guns. It wouldn’t shock me to find a statistic in less than a year of “millions of felons in possession” in the US…that they made felons through subterfuge.

They would of course have to do something about it. Could this be the beginning in the US for a globalist inspired across the board ban (as other countries have done and survived) while the democRATs seem to be getting away with so many outrageous shenanigans? At this point, I don’t rule anything out as impossible.




“Remember to get vaccinated or a vaccinated person might get sick from a virus they got vaccinated against because you’re not vaccinated.” - author unknown
 
Posts: 14397 | Location: Martinsburg WV | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Tuckerrnr1
posted Hide Post


_____________________________________________
I may be a bad person, but at least I use my turn signal.
 
Posts: 5391 | Location: Florida | Registered: March 03, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
hello darkness
my old friend
Picture of gw3971
posted Hide Post
https://youtu.be/tK4gJeJ_CI4


Imported braced pistols would be in violation of 922R and the new ruling requires them to be destroyed or surrendered.

ATF Brace rule page 246: The Department disagrees with the commenter who suggested that there will be financial implications resulting from the removal and replacement of imported parts for owners who imported pistols and added a “stabilizing brace.” The commenter incorrectly
interpreted 18 U.S.C. 922(r) as requiring the removal and replacement of imported parts to comply with section 922(r). Section 922(r) generally makes it unlawful “for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle,” and 27 CFR 478.39 provides that a person may not assemble a semiautomatic rifle using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in the relevant paragraphs of the regulation. The criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 922(r) is for the “assembl[y]” of the semi-automatic rifle; therefore, modification of this kind of firearm through the removal of the relevant parts would not cure the 922(r) violation because the “assembl[y]” has already occurred. Nevertheless, for the purposes of the costs outlined in the standalone RIA, ATF assumes this group may use another scenario, such as destroying the firearm or turning it in to ATF, by using the population derived from bump-stock-type devices as a proxy.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: gw3971,
 
Posts: 7557 | Location: West Jordan, Utah | Registered: June 19, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Greymann
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by gw3971:
https://youtu.be/tK4gJeJ_CI4


******************************




.
 
Posts: 1311 | Location: New Mexico | Registered: March 21, 2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
hello darkness
my old friend
Picture of gw3971
posted Hide Post
Thanks Greymann!
 
Posts: 7557 | Location: West Jordan, Utah | Registered: June 19, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Frangas non Flectes
posted Hide Post
Just what I love hearing from a GunTuber: "What does this mean?" Jesus Christ.

One one hand, yes, it is in there that if you put a brace on an imported pistol that removing it doesn't "cure the 922(r) violation because the 'assembl[y]' has already occurred." On the other, show me one time someone got jammed up over 922r.

ATF can't simply assume every import is in violation, and furthermore, they'd have to prove it. Like, what? They're going to amnesty NFA violations, but 922(r) says we're fucked? Talk about stuff that'll never hold up in court.


______________________________________________
I believe in the 25th amendment.
 
Posts: 15481 | Location: Gilbert, AZ | Registered: February 10, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Shall Not Be Infringed
Picture of nhracecraft
posted Hide Post
I guess the issue 'may' be that if you fill out the form/send them all your info, you're essentially telling them you did it! Curiously, the text referenced in the video isn't part of the rule, as much as it's 'the Department disagrees' with certain comments re:922(r).

From page 246 of the proposed 'Rule':

quote:
Section 922(r)generally makes it unlawful “for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle,” and 27 CFR 478.39 provides that a person may not assemble a semiautomatic rifle using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in the relevant paragraphs of the regulation. The criminal violation under18 U.S.C. 922(r) is for the “assembl[y]”of the semi-automatic rifle;therefore, modification of this kind of firearm through the removal of the relevant parts would not cure the 922(r) violation because the “assembl[y]” has already occurred.

If you consider that ATF has ALREADY approved tax stamps for countless imported pistols that have ALREADY been SBR'd, then what? To use an example from MAC's video, a shitload of B&T APCs, which were imported as Pistols, have been SBR'd over the past several years. Further, EVERYTHING that B&T imports starts out as a Pistol anyway in order to be compliant with current import laws. B&T even imports rifle caliber 'Pistols' and sells Shoulder Stocks as accessories to convert them to Rifles, all with the knowledge and tacit approval of the ATF! All of this has been going on for YEARS! If you go to the eForm 1, the Description of Firearm section even lists Brugger and Thomet (B&T) on the Original Manufacturer and/or Importer 'drop down' list!

So, is it legal or not? And where does that leave one now? You're NOT eligible for the 'free tax stamp'? Are there a newly formed 922(r) Enforcement Action Teams getting ready to descend on unknowing lawful gun owners? Are the coming for all the tax stamps they've already approved? What a Cluster Fuck! Mad


____________________________________________________________

If Some is Good, and More is Better.....then Too Much, is Just Enough !!
Trump 2024....Save America!
"May Almighty God bless the United States of America" - parabellum 7/26/20
Live Free or Die!
 
Posts: 6940 | Location: New Hampshire | Registered: October 29, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The good news for me at least is with my "braced pistol". I can spend less than a minute and put a 16" barrel on it and then replace the black with an adjustable rear stock.



An ASR 'pistol' from TNW in Oregon...

But I agree I should not have to, but then that begs the question is just having the original 10" barrel and brace stored away make me a felon?
 
Posts: 3500 | Location: Greenville, SC | Registered: January 30, 2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Wait, what?
Picture of gearhounds
posted Hide Post
quote:
begs the question is just having the original 10" barrel and brace stored away make me a felon?

Nope. As long as you don’t show intent to assemble anything “illegal”.




“Remember to get vaccinated or a vaccinated person might get sick from a virus they got vaccinated against because you’re not vaccinated.” - author unknown
 
Posts: 14397 | Location: Martinsburg WV | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Still finding my way
Picture of Ryanp225
posted Hide Post
 
Posts: 10318 | Registered: January 04, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Step by step walk the thousand mile road
Picture of Sig2340
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Blume9mm:
The good news for me at least is with my "braced pistol". I can spend less than a minute and put a 16" barrel on it and then replace the black with an adjustable rear stock.

https://i.postimg.cc/wHcRQTtr/...21-at-4-46-48-AM.png

An ASR 'pistol' from TNW in Oregon...

But I agree I should not have to, but then that begs the question is just having the original 10" barrel and brace stored away make me a felon?


If, post-amnesty period, you are found with an AR-pattern lower with brace and a 10” barrel, assembled or not, and you will see it on the indictment under “Possession of illegal SBR.” The felon part comes after your conviction.





Nice is overrated

"It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government."
Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018
 
Posts: 30420 | Location: Loudoun County, Virginia | Registered: May 17, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Shall Not Be Infringed
Picture of nhracecraft
posted Hide Post
People keep focusing on the AR...This affects MUCH more than just ARs of ANY flavor!

That said, with respect to ARs and Short Barrel Upper Receivers, etc, if one already has an AR pattern SBR, then I would submit that you cannot be convicted of 'Constructive Possession of an Illegal SBR'. As temporary modifications are permissible, as long as you have an SBR Lower Receiver to put it on, you're legal.

Generally, I believe it would be wise to have shortest BBL length configuration possible for your SBR (based on what you actually possess), listed on the Form 1 though. While you could always justify the ability to make your SBR longer, I don't think you'd fare well trying to explain having the components to make it shorter! Wink

This message has been edited. Last edited by: nhracecraft,


____________________________________________________________

If Some is Good, and More is Better.....then Too Much, is Just Enough !!
Trump 2024....Save America!
"May Almighty God bless the United States of America" - parabellum 7/26/20
Live Free or Die!
 
Posts: 6940 | Location: New Hampshire | Registered: October 29, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I don't get the whole premise of this 'crisis'.
You now have an illegal SBR because it has a brace.
You remove the brace and you have a pistol (and the ATF has said it will grant you the ability to do that).
Now you can either just keep your pistol (and for imported pistols 922r does not apply) of if you want form1 it and make a legal SBR. For your imported pistol you will have to solve 922r but that is usually not a big issue. So where is the issue?


“So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak.”
 
Posts: 10385 | Registered: October 14, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Peace through
superior firepower
Picture of parabellum
posted Hide Post
Is it really as simple as that? The feds put out a 200+ page ruling on all of this, didn't they? In this forum and on youtube, there are some well-informed people who seem to be struggling to make sense of it all. Can it really be condensed down to a couple of sentences?


____________________________________________________

Endure the present, and watch for better things. - Virgil
 
Posts: 100853 | Registered: January 20, 2000Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    ATF proposing to ban/restrict pistol “braces.” Very short comment period: Please get involved.

© SIGforum 2023