Any News on the ATF and Braces??

[Euler]

On 1/13/2023 at 9:04 PM, davel501 said:

I kind of wonder how they know what's a pistol. Wouldn't this just be a free tax stamp free for all for ARs? 

 

People still have to register (ATF Form 1) their firearms. It's not like they get a stamp to put on anything.

[davel501]

On 1/13/2023 at 9:34 PM, Euler said:

 

People still have to register (ATF Form 1) their firearms. It's not like they get a stamp to put on anything.

 

How would they know? There's no registry. 

[Euler]

On 1/13/2023 at 10:57 PM, davel501 said:

How would they know? There's no registry. 

 

If you file an ATF Form 1, there is.

[davel501]

On 1/13/2023 at 10:00 PM, Euler said:

 

If you file an ATF Form 1, there is.

Not sure what point you're trying to make. 

 

Form 1 asks for the serial number, model, barrel length and length overall.

 

Seems like it would be open to all ARs. 

[korgs130]

What about your braced pistol that has a OAL of less than 26”? You’re SOL, no way to get that form 1 approved in IL. 

[davel501]

On 1/14/2023 at 8:03 AM, korgs130 said:

What about your braced pistol that has a OAL of less than 26”? You’re SOL, no way to get that form 1 approved in IL. 

Do you mean because of the old law? If you have a C&R FFL licenses you can have an SBR in Illinois. There are questions about the new law's effect on that but no hard nos at this point. 

[korgs130]

On 1/14/2023 at 9:02 AM, davel501 said:

Do you mean because of the old law? If you have a C&R FFL licenses you can have an SBR in Illinois. There are questions about the new law's effect on that but no hard nos at this point. 

Yes, with a C&R you can own an SBR but it has to have an OAL of at least 26”. I was referring to the current law: 

 

Public Act 097-0936 

 

(7)  A person possessing a rifle with a barrel or

barrels less than 16 inches in length if: (A) the person

has been issued a Curios and Relics license from the U.S.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; or (B)

the person is an active member of a bona fide, nationally

recognized military re-enacting group and the modification

is required and necessary to accurately portray the weapon

for historical re-enactment purposes; the re-enactor is in

possession of a valid and current re-enacting group

membership credential; and the overall length of the weapon

as modified is not less than 26 inches

[davel501]

On 1/14/2023 at 10:12 AM, korgs130 said:

Yes, with a C&R you can own an SBR but it has to have an OAL of at least 26”. I was referring to the current law: 

 

Public Act 097-0936 

 

(7)  A person possessing a rifle with a barrel or

barrels less than 16 inches in length if: (A) the person

has been issued a Curios and Relics license from the U.S.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; or (B)

the person is an active member of a bona fide, nationally

recognized military re-enacting group and the modification

is required and necessary to accurately portray the weapon

for historical re-enactment purposes; the re-enactor is in

possession of a valid and current re-enacting group

membership credential; and the overall length of the weapon

as modified is not less than 26 inches

Got it now. What barrel length gets you under that 26" OAL? 

[runningwild]

Could be stopped by congress. 
Congressional review act.  

[Tvandermyde]

based upon the 5th circuit Court of Appeals decision on bump stocks, and the 80% frame and receiver rule being litigated there, I would expect  to see a race between SAF//FPC/GOA to race there to file on this new rule and seek an injunction. 

 

The bump stock ruling is huge and impacts all of this as does the decision in the EPA case last year. 

[davel501]

30 minutes of searching and still can't find rough OAL for a given barrel and buffer combination. Can't imagine the manufacturing tolerances are that wide. 

[Tim85]

On 1/14/2023 at 11:15 AM, davel501 said:

30 minutes of searching and still can't find rough OAL for a given barrel and buffer combination. Can't imagine the manufacturing tolerances are that wide. 

11.5” barrel with standard buffer tube and brace collapsed nets 27.375 to end of a2 flash hider

[davel501]

On 1/14/2023 at 12:44 PM, Tim85 said:

11.5” barrel with standard buffer tube and brace collapsed nets 27.375 to end of a2 flash hider

 

The measurement is brace extended to end of barrel. Guessing you'll end up right at 30".

 

I just measured a SOLGW Trunk Monkey that I had access to. 10.5" barrel, standard buffer, SBA3 brace and it came in right at 29".

[crufflesmuth]

The better question: is an SBR distinguishable from an "assault" weapon in Illinois?

[davel501]

Parliament's ban only extends to semiautomatic weapons. The ATF could still shoot your dog for having too short a barrel on your bolt action rifle. 

[Euler]

 

Tom Grieve points out in the video that the ATF has said that some pistol braces DO NOT make an pistol into an SBR. Thus they would not be subject to the "final rule." Unfortunately, the ATF has not said which braces those are. It also reserves the ability to change its mind if ever it says one is okay.

 

What it has done is provide two documents listing pistol/brace combinations that are now considered SBRs.

Commercially available combinations (partial list)

Aftermarket combinations (partial list)

 

I believe the defining condition in these lists is the brace itself. "Offending" braces from the lists include:

 

AR platforms

SB Tactical SBA3

SB Tactical SBA4

SB Tactical SBM4

SB Tactical SOB

SB Tactical HBPDW (Honey Badger)

SB Tactical SBPDW

SB Tactical SBX-K

SB Tactical SB-Mini

SB Tactical SBL

SB Tactical SBG-G2

Maxim PDW

Magpul BTR

Gearhead Works Tailhook

Gearhead Works Tailhook Mod1

Gearhead Works Tailhook Mod1C

Gearhead Works Tailhook Mod2

Gearhead Works Mini Tailhook

Shockwave Blade

Mission First Tactical BMPSB

Mission First Tactical Breach 2.0

 

AK platforms

SB Tactical AKTF

SB Tactical 47

SB Tactical SBL

 

H&K platforms

Gearhead Works Tailhook Mod1

SB Tactical SB5

SB Tactical SBT5KA

H&K HKPDW

 

Pistol-caliber carbines

SB Tactical SBTi (ATF calls it SBT1)

SB Tactical SBTEVO

SB Tactical FS1913

SB Tactical SBX-K

SB Tactical SBT5A

SIG PCB

SIG PSB

Strike Industries MPX

Magpul BTR

CZ CZPDW

 

Handgun conversion kits (some appear to be homebrew alterations)

Flux Raider

Recover Tactical 20/20N

Shockwave Blade

SB Tactical SBA3

FAB Defense KPOS Slingshot

CAA Micro Roni

CAA MCK Gen 2

CAA MCK Gen 3

SIG PSB

[BeardswithoutOperators]

On 1/13/2023 at 4:23 PM, davel501 said:

I do like the idea of a free tax stamp BUT how does this work with the new Illinois law? I don't think I would have to get it engraved because I'm not manufacturing it / changing anything. Would it still be the same gun to Illinois?

Disclaimer: not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.

 

It will not and cannot be a free tax stamp. The ATF DOES NOT have the ability to waive a federal tax. If you are thinking about doing a form 4, just pay the tax stamp, otherwise you have just incriminated yourself as possessing a sbr, and on top of that, sent a picture of it to the ATF so that they have evidence.

 

Don’t get the free registration, just don’t. If you want to form 1 or form 4, go right ahead though.

[defaultdotxbe]

The rule specifically says they aren't banning braces, but also says I have to destroy my brace if I remove it from my pistol rather than registering or putting on a longer barrel? How does that make sense, why should I have to destroy something that isn't being banned?

[Euler]

On 1/15/2023 at 7:30 PM, defaultdotxbe said:

.... why should I have to destroy something that isn't being banned?

 

Constructive possession. If you take it off, they don't trust you not to put it back on.

 

Not advocating. Just explaining.

[defaultdotxbe]

On 1/15/2023 at 6:37 PM, Euler said:

 

Constructive possession. If you take it off, they don't trust you not to put it back on.

 

Not advocating. Just explaining.

The ATF has never applied the concept of constructive possession in the manner you're stating though. There is "collection of parts" language in the NFA, but it doesn't apply to SBRs (only machine guns, suppressors, and destructive devices)

 

And if they are applying it to SBRs (despite not having the legal authority to do so) it expands a lot farther than just the braces. Read through their worksheet, you can turn a legal braced pistol into an SBR by swapping out the optic. Are they making you destroy all your scopes too? It says I can replace the barrel with one that's 16 inches, but I don't have to destroy the short barrel? Why do they trust me not to put that back on?

 

I think they are just trying to strong-arm people into destroying their property when they have no legal authority to do so.

[agalloch07]

You just have to take the pistol brace off to make it a pistol again i thought? Or am i wrong?

[Just some guy]

From SAF today. SAF RIPS ATF ‘FINAL RULE’ ON ARM BRACES, LAWSUIT WILL MOVE FORWARD

The Second Amendment Foundation today accused the Biden administration of “once again trying to trample the rights of gun owners” by allowing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to adopt a “final rule” on arm braces for modern semiautomatic pistols.

While the definition of a rifle in federal law should be clear, noted attorney Chad Flores, who is representing SAF in a federal lawsuit filed two years ago that was stayed by the court in anticipation of this new rule, it is clear the Biden administration’s new definition of a rifle ignores tradition. SAF sued ATF and the U.S. Attorney General in 2021 in a case known as SAF et. al. v. BATFE, et. al.

SAF is joined in that case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. 

According to Flores’ analysis of the 291-page Final Rule, the definition of a “rifle” now turns on a bewildering six-factor test. This new definition can be controlled not by the firearm’s objective characteristics, but instead by what ATF agents in D.C. think of a manufacturer’s marketing materials or the firearm’s “likely use.”  The new rule itself is forced to admit its dramatic result: Under this new definitional regime, “a majority of the existing firearms equipped with a ‘stabilizing brace’ are likely to be classified as ‘rifles.’” 

“The Biden administration’s new rifle definition overrides the true wish of Congress, to upend the reasonable expectations of stabilizing brace users and makers nationwide,” Flores said.

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb noted the foundation’s 2021 lawsuit raised critical points about what has now been adopted by ATF. 

“When we started this process,” Gottlieb said, “we anticipated where the agency’s efforts would lead. With our co-plaintiffs, we will continue to challenge this new arm brace rule.”

[Euler]

On 1/15/2023 at 9:34 PM, agalloch07 said:

You just have to take the pistol brace off to make it a pistol again i thought? Or am i wrong?

 

You're half right. Remove the brace, then destroy it. At least that's what the ATF says it wants.

[top_notch]

On 1/15/2023 at 10:16 PM, Euler said:

 

You're half right. Remove the brace, then destroy it. At least that's what the ATF says it wants.

 

So, if an Illinois resident had an AR15 Pistol with sb3 brace. 

 

To be legal with the ATF "ruling", they would have to remove the brace and destroy it.  Thus, rendering it (according to the AFT) an "Assault Pistol" (and no longer an SBR).  Since CCW passed in Illinois and there is preemption, but with the latest Assault Rifles/Pistol being banned (to certain magazine limits), it would be perfect legal to own/shoot an AR15 Pistol with no brace as long as one used a 10 round mag.  (Assuming these new laws/rulings stay...which seems iffy...but I digress)

 

I guess I'm confused with Illinois' new law and the ATF 'ruling' and how they combine ... and what they really mean.

 

Spoiler

Asking for a friend.

 

 

Edited January 16, 2023 at 04:54 AM by top_notch

[Flynn]

On 1/15/2023 at 10:51 PM, top_notch said:

but with the latest Assault Rifles/Pistol being banned (to certain magazine limits), it would be perfect legal to own/shoot an AR15 Pistol with no brace as long as one used a 10 round mag. 

 

I don't have the IL bill in front of me right now, but I believe any pistol with a buffer tube is deemed an assault weapon as is every AR type pistol for that matter, the CC exemption says it is not applicable to any listed pistol types listed in the bitl as assault weapons, the AR pistols types are specifically codified as assualt weapons mooting that exemption.

[Euler]

On 1/15/2023 at 11:51 PM, top_notch said:

...

I guess I'm confused with Illinois' new law and the ATF 'ruling' and how they combine ... and what they really mean.

...

 

My understanding:

• If you live in a municipality/county with a rifle ban or don't have a C&R, you must remove the brace and destroy it, then register the pistol with the state.
• If you don't live in a municipality/county with a rifle ban and have a C&R, you have the additional option to leave the brace on and register it with the both feds and the state.
• No matter where you live, you can fulfill both the state's and the feds' ultimate desire and destroy the whole thing.

 

However, I think there are some people who own (registered) SBRs in places where ARs are banned. I'm not sure how that works.

 

Or you can do nothing and wait until courts issue injunctions against both. I suspect this choice will be the most popular.

[Jeckler]

With regards to AR and AR lowers, The existing rules dictate that “once a rifle, always a rifle”. Yet, a pistol can have parts added or removed to covert to rifle and back to pistol. 
 

How does this change under the new rules?  
 

If an existing pistol with brace is now registered SBR under the new rules, is it permanently a rifle?  Can it ever be conveyed back to the original pistol configuration?

 

 

[Jeffrey]

They want you to destroy something that they've now deemed to be illegal?  But when you paid for it it was legal.  Shouldn't they be responsible to reimburse you?  I think I paid close to 10grand for one.

[defaultdotxbe]

On 1/16/2023 at 7:23 AM, Jeckler said:

With regards to AR and AR lowers, The existing rules dictate that “once a rifle, always a rifle”. Yet, a pistol can have parts added or removed to covert to rifle and back to pistol. 
 

How does this change under the new rules?  
 

If an existing pistol with brace is now registered SBR under the new rules, is it permanently a rifle?  Can it ever be conveyed back to the original pistol configuration?

 

 

If you convert a registered SBR to a pistol configuration its still an SBR, and still legal so long as its registered (you have to notify the ATF of any change to OAL though) At that point it will be a "weapon made from a rifle."

 

You can petition to have it removed from the NFA registry if its in a non-NFA configuration and you don't plan to go back to an SBR, but this is reviewed on a case-by-case basis and my from understanding almost never approved.

[defaultdotxbe]

On 1/16/2023 at 8:55 AM, Jeffrey said:

They want you to destroy something that they've now deemed to be illegal?  But when you paid for it it was legal.  Shouldn't they be responsible to reimburse you?  I think I paid close to 10grand for one.

They haven't even deemed them illegal, the rule explicitly states braces are not banned, only certain configurations of braced pistol are deemed SBRs rather than pistols.

 

So they want you to destroy something that is still legal, but they hope you'll be intimidated into destroying it anyway.