Messages
10,050
Reactions
20,514
Ooh, for those worried about the "88 day denial" and about the DOJ ignoring 26 USC 5848 and so on.. just go and stamp the handgun/pistol/firearms. Why? In the very real possibility case that Fed Courts invalidates the Final Rule but allow the free SBR thing to go.... legally you aren't guilty of making an unregistered SBR if the Courts side with SAF and such and say " yeah no. Braces are not stocks" and thus, you still haven't made a SBR yet.

It is also very likely that Fed Courts will also put a TRO on the enforcement of any "potential violations" under the Final Rule after the 120 day window passes.
 
Messages
2,264
Reactions
2,816
That's not what the ATF told me when I started buying braces & far as I'm concerned they aren't allowed to change their minds & make millions of Americans into criminals anytime they like
I get where you’re coming from but would hate for you to be the one who creates “standing” for legal precedent. Would be very expensive.
 
Messages
10,050
Reactions
20,514
Also... honestly one of the goals for the next NFA lawsuit should be to completely invalidate and nullify the NFA, not just the specific categories (silencers,AOW. SBRs)

Edit. I mean really. Just about 3 million registered NFA items? if apply Caetano which says "200,000 stun guns are not "dangerous and unusual" (Massachusetts argued that) weapons, but are commonly possessed for lawful purposes and under the protection of 2A"...... then 3 million registered NFA items as well as supposedly 3-7 million "unregistered SBRs" by ATF own words... that is far and away into the realm of "commonly possessed for lawful purposes" :rolleyes: again, I don't quite trust the Courts to see it that way...
 
Messages
2,749
Reactions
5,015
Ooh, for those worried about the "88 day denial" and about the DOJ ignoring 26 USC 5848 and so on.. just go and stamp the handgun/pistol/firearms. Why? In the very real possibility case that Fed Courts invalidates the Final Rule but allow the free SBR thing to go.... legally you aren't guilty of making an unregistered SBR if the Courts side with SAF and such and say " yeah no. Braces are not stocks" and thus, you still haven't made a SBR yet.

It is also very likely that Fed Courts will also put a TRO on the enforcement of any "potential violations" under the Final Rule after the 120 day window passes.
This is what I am kind of expecting
 
Messages
228
Reactions
178
1674625194630.jpeg
Any truth to this?
 
Messages
7,122
Reactions
11,952
Sounds like the author of this is believing the hype of the GOA first video and because they saw it on video now they are saying they admitted it on camera. Which is incorrect. Fear spreads like wildfire, even if it's not accurate. Watch the short video in post 1155 it explains it.
 
Messages
228
Reactions
178
Sounds like the author of this is believing the hype of the GOA first video and because they saw it on video now they are saying they admitted it on camera. Which is incorrect. Fear spreads like wildfire, even if it's not accurate. Watch the short video in post 1155 it explains it.
Thank you. Just watched the video.

But I’m just more confused now. Your response made it sound like the info I was asking about was incorrect. I then watched the video and it seemed to support the info I was asking about?
 
Messages
10,050
Reactions
20,514
Cliffs note version.

If you are one of the 2.2% whose BG checks will go over 88 days; then it's a MAYBE; as per someone here, the vast majority of ATF bg checks are 20 minutes if that, and it's usually just the administrative paperwork and bureaucracy that takes long time for a stamp to clear; but a BG check has to happen before they can go further on the paperwork.

The only verifiable thing relating to the 88 day thing is the FBI policy of purging/deleting unresolved BG checks from their databases by the 88th day in order to make room for new ones, the ATF uses the same databases but has their own examiners apparently.


Also, even if you are one of the 2.2% whose BG checks don't clear until 88 days; you do have the legal protection of 26 USC 5848; if you didn't lie on the NFA paperwork and are not a prohibited person...

The cited law just now, says the DOJ/ATF cannot use the evidence/information from submission for complying with NFA laws/rules as evidence of you having committed a felony of having an unregistered NFA item; unless you gave then false information; then you lose the legal protection.

The DOJ could may well go after people but in a court case, if it turns out their entire argument and evidence are based on the self-incrimination of submitting information and so forth, the judge in that case can rightfully dismiss/drop/make a summary judgement against the ATF on the basis of 26 USC 5848 and throw out ATF's evidence that was gathered while you provided them with the information.
 
Messages
228
Reactions
178
Cliffs note version.

If you are one of the 2.2% whose BG checks will go over 88 days; then it's a MAYBE; as per someone here, the vast majority of ATF bg checks are 20 minutes if that, and it's usually just the administrative paperwork and bureaucracy that takes long time for a stamp to clear; but a BG check has to happen before they can go further on the paperwork.

The only verifiable thing relating to the 88 day thing is the FBI policy of purging/deleting unresolved BG checks from their databases by the 88th day in order to make room for new ones, the ATF uses the same databases but has their own examiners apparently.


Also, even if you are one of the 2.2% whose BG checks don't clear until 88 days; you do have the legal protection of 26 USC 5848; if you didn't lie on the NFA paperwork and are not a prohibited person...

The cited law just now, says the DOJ/ATF cannot use the evidence/information from submission for complying with NFA laws/rules as evidence of you having committed a felony of having an unregistered NFA item; unless you gave then false information; then you lose the legal protection.

The DOJ could may well go after people but in a court case, if it turns out their entire argument and evidence are based on the self-incrimination of submitting information and so forth, the judge in that case can rightfully dismiss/drop/make a summary judgement against the ATF on the basis of 26 USC 5848 and throw out ATF's evidence that was gathered while you provided them with the information.
Thank you.
 
Messages
2,264
Reactions
2,816
Cliffs note version.
If you are one of the 2.2% whose BG checks will go over 88 days; then it's a MAYBE; as per someone here, the vast majority of ATF bg checks are 20 minutes if that, and it's usually just the administrative paperwork and bureaucracy that takes long time for a stamp to clear; but a BG check has to happen before they can go further on the paperwork.

The only verifiable thing relating to the 88 day thing is the FBI policy of purging/deleting unresolved BG checks from their databases by the 88th day in order to make room for new ones, the ATF uses the same databases but has their own examiners apparently.


Also, even if you are one of the 2.2% whose BG checks don't clear until 88 days; you do have the legal protection of 26 USC 5848; if you didn't lie on the NFA paperwork and are not a prohibited person...

The cited law just now, says the DOJ/ATF cannot use the evidence/information from submission for complying with NFA laws/rules as evidence of you having committed a felony of having an unregistered NFA item; unless you gave then false information; then you lose the legal protection.

The DOJ could may well go after people but in a court case, if it turns out their entire argument and evidence are based on the self-incrimination of submitting information and so forth, the judge in that case can rightfully dismiss/drop/make a summary judgement against the ATF on the basis of 26 USC 5848 and throw out ATF's evidence that was gathered while you provided them with the information.
While I agree a charge from the ATF likely be thrown out, how much money do you have set aside for a self defense attorney? Notwithstanding potential arrest, jail pending hearing , bail bond, and lost work time. There is no aspect of this that seems worth it when you can just take off the brace or make the pistol a rifle, 922R being considered.
Another aspect to consider in WA, is the AWB may pass, which would potentially result in the ATF denying your application due to it being illegal to “create” a new AW. The likelihood of the AWB becoming law before you get your stamp back is almost certain.
Another friend of mine mentioned he would rather pay the $200 and register a stripped lower as an SBR than admit being in possession of a constructed SBR… and he’s an attorney.
So many pitfalls over the desire to get something for free…

8CF39404-2CC3-44C8-8B2A-068D10B3D020.png
 
Messages
10,050
Reactions
20,514
Cliffs note version.

While I agree a charge from the ATF likely be thrown out, how much money do you have set aside for a self defense attorney? Notwithstanding potential arrest, jail pending hearing , bail bond, and lost work time. There is no aspect of this that seems worth it when you can just take off the brace or make the pistol a rifle, 922R being considered.
Another aspect to consider in WA, is the AWB may pass, which would potentially result in the ATF denying your application due to it being illegal to “create” a new AW. The likelihood of the AWB becoming law before you get your stamp back is almost certain.
Another friend of mine mentioned he would rather pay the $200 and register a stripped lower as an SBR than admit being in possession of a constructed SBR… and he’s an attorney.
So many pitfalls over the desire to get something for free…

View attachment 1352277
That's a big risk in States where there are AWBs on the books or pending (likely to pass).however, so far... I haven't read of any requests from the ATF for photo of whole brace equipped firearm... yet. So in theory; until they require/requests a photo of the whole thing; one may likely still have just a lower, or simply a legal handgun/pistol/firearm that just so happens to have a brace "available" for the purposes of the registry :rolleyes: (again, you do run the risk of being accused of providing "false information/records" if you literally have just a lower and no brace in existence)
 
Messages
2,264
Reactions
2,816
That's a big risk in States where there are AWBs on the books or pending (likely to pass).however, so far... I haven't read of any requests from the ATF for photo of whole brace equipped firearm... yet. So in theory; until they require/requests a photo of the whole thing; one may likely still have just a lower, or simply a legal handgun/pistol/firearm that just so happens to have a brace "available" for the purposes of the registry :rolleyes: (again, you do run the risk of being accused of providing "false information/records" if you literally have just a lower and no brace in existence)
Just another reason to remain silent, not inviolate the 5th, and avoid this fiasco.
 
Messages
10,050
Reactions
20,514
Just another reason to remain silent, not inviolate the 5th, and avoid this fiasco.
Indeed. How many 12" barreled, C7 A1 upper, 6.5 Grendels with pinned FSBs are out there.... ;) there's already photo evidence of one such firearm with a 3d printed brace as well as the same firearm with a buffer tube cover and cheek rest that according to those subjective, vague criteria, may be considered a SBR of some sort.... but so far, the Federal Register doesn't have it officially published and the lawsuit from SAF can move forward so its all about wait and see... edit. I could remove buffer tube and get a stubby pistol tube and then it can be for the most part, a large handgun/pistol but again.... prior evidence and all that, unless I decide to sell the upper and then bam no more "unregistered SBR" :rolleyes:
 

Upcoming Events

Latest Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top