JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
If the only reason a person registers an SBR is for the hope they won't make you a felon in the future, disappointment is around the corner. If a person hopes they aren't already on someone's list, disappointment is also around the corner. They are already systematically criminalizing everyone. Agencies have been weaponized against the American people. Congress is having hearings on this very fact. Nothing has changed my opinion that consequences are coming regardless of which choice we make.
There's still more of us gun owners than there are of the Federal Agents but.... I doubt that's gonna stop the Feds from continuing to steamroll and from Fed apologists continuing to make fun and put down fellow gun owners for having valid doubts. It does seem most gun owners are tired and tired of continuing to bend over... and not seeing an end in sight when they still have good jobs and the like.
 
7gpcxa.jpg
 
There's a point when you ought to remind yourself that the pistol brace was always a BS legal workaround that seemingly no one believed the ATF would have approved. Maybe some of the early ones looked vaguely like a device for the disabled, but that quickly went by the wayside and they became what they were intended to be - rifle stocks disguised as something else because they had a velcro strap attached to them.

Having convinced the ATF that something that's clearly a rifle stock is not, we all decided that this recent innovation is part of our 2A rights, as if Jefferson himself had an opinion whether braces are stocks or not.


I totally get the joy of "getting away with it". I had a scooter that went much faster than it legally should have. If the government does a poor job of regulating the stuff it is supposed to, that's not my problem and I'll enjoy getting away with it.

Anyone who thinks that braces were here to stay is smoking something. It was always a way to get around SBR registration. Nothing more. Has anyone ever seen brace users holding their AR pistols at arms length exclusively? Of course not.


The upside is that the ATF's past stupidity has netted us 4 months to turn one of those rinkydink, stupid looking braces into full-on adjustable, locking, comfortable sliding stocks on legit SBRs for FREE. So, yet again, we get away with something. Hurray!


But I don't have any patience for the bump stock martyrs. How can it be a shock that perfecting the bump stock so that it is practically a machinegun had an expiration date where regulators said "um, that's a machinegun".

I hope binary trigger owners are okay with renting those devices. They are really cool, while they last.


But let's act like adults and realize that having gotten away with something you know is sketchy is not the same thing as having a right. This has nothing to do with whether you think that ANY gun regulation is Constitutional. Because we're not mad that there's a law; we're mad that the law isn't favorable TO US anymore.
 
There's a point when you ought to remind yourself that the pistol brace was always a BS legal workaround that seemingly no one believed the ATF would have approved. Maybe some of the early ones looked vaguely like a device for the disabled, but that quickly went by the wayside and they became what they were intended to be - rifle stocks disguised as something else because they had a velcro strap attached to them.

Having convinced the ATF that something that's clearly a rifle stock is not, we all decided that this recent innovation is part of our 2A rights, as if Jefferson himself had an opinion whether braces are stocks or not.


I totally get the joy of "getting away with it". I had a scooter that went much faster than it legally should have. If the government does a poor job of regulating the stuff it is supposed to, that's not my problem and I'll enjoy getting away with it.

Anyone who thinks that braces were here to stay is smoking something. It was always a way to get around SBR registration. Nothing more. Has anyone ever seen brace users holding their AR pistols at arms length exclusively? Of course not.


The upside is that the ATF's past stupidity has netted us 4 months to turn one of those rinkydink, stupid looking braces into full-on adjustable, locking, comfortable sliding stocks on legit SBRs for FREE. So, yet again, we get away with something. Hurray!


But I don't have any patience for the bump stock martyrs. How can it be a shock that perfecting the bump stock so that it is practically a machinegun had an expiration date where regulators said "um, that's a machinegun".

I hope binary trigger owners are okay with renting those devices. They are really cool, while they last.


But let's act like adults and realize that having gotten away with something you know is sketchy is not the same thing as having a right. This has nothing to do with whether you think that ANY gun regulation is Constitutional. Because we're not mad that there's a law; we're mad that the law isn't favorable TO US anymore.
I'm going to reiterate what's been said a few times in the past.

If Congress had written, and passed a bill to Amend both the NFA and GCA to include these 6 criteria to determine whether a design of firearm meets the definition of a "rifle" or not; and directed the ATF to enforce that bill , then would there be as much wailing and gnashing of teeth on this? :rolleyes:

I am just saying that if the Biden Administration had done so using legal means such as having Congress amend or pass bills or amend budget bills with such Amendments to the GCA and NFA; then there would be much less speculation and BSing around.. sure maybe there'd be big lawsuits, but that issue would start and maybe end in DC District/SCOTUS as opposed to Texas district.
 
I'm going to reiterate what's been said a few times in the past.

If Congress had written, and passed a bill to Amend both the NFA and GCA to include these 6 criteria to determine whether a design of firearm meets the definition of a "rifle" or not; and directed the ATF to enforce that bill , then would there be as much wailing and gnashing of teeth on this? :rolleyes:

I am just saying that if the Biden Administration had done so using legal means such as having Congress amend or pass bills or amend budget bills with such Amendments to the GCA and NFA; then there would be much less speculation and BSing around.. sure maybe there'd be big lawsuits, but that issue would start and maybe end in DC District/SCOTUS as opposed to Texas district.
And if the innovative gun industry wasn't constantly looking for ways to violate the spirit of the law by finding technicalities to use as work-arounds, gun consumers wouldn't end up needing to get upset about how their new toys sometimes disappear due to regulators.


Some day soon, someone is going to figure out how to use noise cancelling technology to make a silencer with no baffles. A bunch of people will buy them, spending thousands, and then will inevitably loose their minds when the ATF wakes up and says "Ah, no. That's still a silencer and requires registration."
 
And if the innovative gun industry wasn't constantly looking for ways to violate the spirit of the law by finding technicalities to use as work-arounds, gun consumers wouldn't end up needing to get upset about how their new toys sometimes disappear due to regulators.


Some day soon, someone is going to figure out how to use noise cancelling technology to make a silencer with no baffles. A bunch of people will buy them, spending thousands, and then will inevitably loose their minds when the ATF wakes up and says "Ah, no. That's still a silencer and requires registration."
I think the ATF already has said that any device that changes (not necessarily reduce) the report of the weapon is a silencer. Otherwise we would have been blessed with the XM177E1 moderator cans, without needing to register them :rolleyes: or the "loudener" flash hiders
 
I think the ATF already has said that any device that changes (not necessarily reduce) the report of the weapon is a silencer. Otherwise we would have been blessed with the XM177E1 moderator cans, without needing to register them :rolleyes: or the "loudener" flash hiders
Moderator cans have internal baffles, so it isn't surprising that they are treated like silencers. Being a poor silencer isn't a reason to ignore the regulated construction.

But my example was just off the top of my head. I'm glad the ATF has some foresight, sometimes. But the definition I read seems like it would include the insulating walls of a gun range, so there must be more to it than the text of the law.
 
Also.... maybe it doesn't matter that much that it's about the devices themselves... but what does matter.. ATF for 10+ years, told SB Tactical, and other companies, that pistol braces did not redesign a firearm into a rifle. And.. maybe the important thing.. does THE ATF really have the authority to write regulations that have criminal penalties with no Congressional bill authorizing such? Maybe semantics, but last I remember... a regulation/ruling that has criminal penalties/consequences was known as a law and only the legislative branch(Congress) has the sole power to write law....? Maybe that's why so many people are concerned about the ATF/DOJ being allowed to do this when there are real tangible problems that's being blatantly ignored.....


Edit. I mean, under the new "criteria", a cheek rest, or even a single point sling, or just a foam buffer tube cover.. could all be "redesigns the firearm to be a rifle", given the vagueness... and it's not restricted only to pistol braced firearms
 
Also.... maybe it doesn't matter that much that it's about the devices themselves... but what does matter.. ATF for 10+ years, told SB Tactical, and other companies, that pistol braces did not redesign a firearm into a rifle. And.. maybe the important thing.. does THE ATF really have the authority to write regulations that have criminal penalties with no Congressional bill authorizing such? Maybe semantics, but last I remember... a regulation/ruling that has criminal penalties/consequences was known as a law and only the legislative branch(Congress) has the sole power to write law....? Maybe that's why so many people are concerned about the ATF/DOJ being allowed to do this when there are real tangible problems that's being blatantly ignored.....
All regulation is like that. Congress can write a law that says you can deduct business expenses, but they don't write laws that have every possible business expense listed. They expect regulators, LE, DAs and judges to make reasonable interpretations of laws as they apply to specific cases. We are fortunate to have regulators giving us the regulations up front instead of just enforcement officers on the back end.

The ATF is not confiscating braced pistols, prosecuting brace makers or demanding back taxes. Instead it is saying that since it was wrong in the past, everyone gets a free tax stamp. That''s pretty solid customer service.

SB Tactical will no longer be able to sell braces. But that is no different than the paint companies that could no longer sell leaded paint.
 
Buy a lower, register it as the SBR. Add a stock or brace to it.

Use your current AR pistol without a brace. Transfer the upper when you want to use a brace/stock to the other. Take this one in your car, across state lines, etc. Free stamp and best of both worlds.
 
Is that definitely the case if you already own the pistol that you want to turn into an SBR?
Since the ATF sees it as merely ratifying something already built before Jan 31, I don't know if they would be in opposition to 1240 if they approved the Form 1. But it makes sense to get the paperwork in sooner rather than later.
 
OP, I don't have an AR and therefore no dog in the "brace fight", but have you considered simply replacing the barrel with a pinned-and-welded 14.5" or similar, depending on the length of your muzzle device, and calling it a day? That will give you the shortest possible configuration without having legal issues, difficulty selling your firearm in the future, or what many don't think about, legal troubles for your family should something happen to you and they end up with an NFA weapon in their possession without realizing it…
 
For a little perspective, the dedicated brace eform is easy to fill out (use instructions on the 80% lowers website). You can take you own photo and size it in MS Paint, do your own fingerprints and if it is a factory lower, no photos of the receiver are necessary. You can do everything in about an hour.
 

Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors March Gun Show
Portland, OR
Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top