ATF brace rule is out

[12Bravo20]

That happens when ANY individual or Responsible Person on a trust does not get a "proceed" response from the FBI on their background check. It means the FBI was unable to resolve the applicants background check within the time limit. After 88 days ATF disapproves the Form 1 or Form 4. IT AIN'T NEW, it's been the standard protocol for over a decade.

The GOA should know better.....or does and is using this to suck in new members,

I'm sure they are using things to suck in new members. They are doing the same thing that the NRA has been doing for years. Nothing like a good scare to boost membership numbers and also increase donations too.

Ain't nobody got time for that!
Its easier to go to Youtube and clickity click click.
Then come here and post a link to a stupid Youtube video.

Not only are people relying on YouTube videos and not bothering to read the actual ATF documents, but they are failing to read through all of the replies in the different posts. I don't know how many times that I have answered peoples' questions that they would not have asked if they would read ALL replies. And I know you, MachIV and others have done the same as me.

 

[herrwalther]

In preparation, I ordered some foam end caps for the buffer tubes. It isn't a braced firearm when it is just a section of the firearm recoil system covered in foam. Unless I read a different declaration from a trustworthy source, this is what I am going with in lieu of registration or destruction.

 

[tarosean]

In preparation, I ordered some foam end caps for the buffer tubes.

where? I was just thinking I do not know if I kept those.

Course would the BATFE construe those as increasing the surface area?

 

[12Bravo20]

Course would the BATFE construe those as increasing the surface area?

That is the million dollar question. Along with that, would they consider foam as a cheek rest and then say the intention is to use it as a cheek rest - which they say shows intent to shoot using two hands.

 

[DoubleMag]

Cheek rest technique, which has been around like, 35 yrs + , is ONLY mentioned in 4 areas of the rule and directly linked to using a brace.

On pg 47 the bureau shows a shooter with an Ak style firearm and a brace being cheek welded. Again, the Capt. Obvious thingie here, cheek weld-brace, brace-cheek weld. On the following pages pg 80 they state even that, the firearm has ''demonstrates shooters using a “cheek welding” firing technique where the objective design features of a rifle are also evident. (my emphasis at underlining ed.)''
What is evident, there is no rearward part of the firearm necessary for the firearm's function such as is the case in an AR i.e. buffer tube. What they have stated consistently and noticed by others in similar posts, you don't have a real firearm part back there to hang a brace on, discussion is over right-quick.

HOWEVER, to unclear things and in true bureaucracy fashion, the next line says some weird like ''it helps line the sights up (para.)''. Wow! Line the sights up to shoot whodda thought of that could be a good idea!

 

[12Bravo20]

Well I never said that what the ATF is saying about using a "cheek weld" when shooting makes any sense because it does NOT. I was only putting the information out there so people know about it and can then make an educated decision for themselves.

And we all know this whole rule change is a stinking pile. I am just trying to help others understand the rule.

 

[DustyGmt]

I wish the 290+ page document was as clear cut to me as it is to others. I went through that document and it just confuses me more than anything. I think people should read the document, but I don't blame people that want to ask other knowledgeable people for more clear cut answers to specific questions.

From what I can gather, this whole thing is sucky and I can't wait to follow the legal challenges and hope that the courts throw a wrench in the works over at AFT. I'm not holding my breath for the NFA to be repealed though....we just ain't that lucky but it does seem that whenever there is an anti gun administration in office for some reason that's when we catch a break....

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

Good listen or read.

Rep. Clyde to Newsmax: ATF Does 'Not Have Authority to Make New Law' | Newsmax.com

 

[P89DCSS]

My Ruger 9mm PC Charger (6.5" barrel) has a 1913 rail on the backend and I have a folding brace that mounts on the rail.
- I need to dispose/destroy the 1913 brace or get a SBR tax stamp because it's the only firearm that I can mount the brace on and it's just a hex-head bolt and 10 seconds?

Not clear to me, is the no-cost SBR tax stamp available for the PC Charger?

 

[someguy2800]

Not clear to me, is the no-cost SBR tax stamp available for the PC Charger?

yes

 

[herrwalther]

where? I was just thinking I do not know if I kept those.

Outdoor Sports USA. They are on sale now for $8 each. Probably selling a lot of them with this new rule out.

 

[Lennyjoe]

Outdoor Sports USA. They are on sale now for $8 each. Probably selling a lot of them with this new rule out.

Wondering if the foam end caps would be considered a provision to cheek weld the buffer tube in the eyes of the ATF…..

 

[Varminterror]

Wondering if the foam end caps would be considered a provision to cheek weld the buffer tube in the eyes of the ATF…..

Cheek weld isn’t a shoulder stock.

 

[Lennyjoe]

Cheek weld isn’t a shoulder stock.

While I agree with your input, the following out of the ATF response is a concern. Wouldn’t put it past ATF to use that against AR pistol tubes with foam on them. Maybe I’m being paranoid….

 

[BreechFace]

While I agree with your input, the following out of the ATF response is a concern. Wouldn’t put it past ATF to use that against AR pistol tubes with foam on them. Maybe I’m being paranoid….

View attachment 1128916

What about a foam pad that is only on the center of the pistol buffer tube, so that it doesn't extend or enlarge the rear contact surface? This would simply provide a better cheek engagement to the pistol.

I'm going to be trying out cheek weld shooting with my pistol AR's there is a guy (Demonstrated Concepts) on youtube that is very proficient at it and, I think it's worth a try as the benefits of a pistol AR is known and of great importance when it comes to CCW licensing covering it as well as traveling between states.

For me the juice is not worth the squeeze to SBR much of anything. Pin and welded 14.5" barreled AR's are plenty maneuverable and doesn't give in to the ATF registration scheme they have going. If I'm in my home a pinned and welded 14.5" AR rifle is going to be grabbed, if I'm on the road in a state that I have CCW reciprocity and they allow it a concealed AR pistol is going to be much more handy then either a carbine or SBR.

 

[someguy2800]

I am also curious how the foam tubes are going to be viewed. From my reading of the rules it should be okay as long as it doesn't cover or extend past the end of the buffer tube. If it does either of the above then I think you are opening yourself to interpretation.

 

[12Bravo20]

I'm going to be trying out cheek weld shooting with my pistol AR's there is a guy (Demonstrated Concepts) on youtube that is very proficient at it and, I think it's worth a try as the benefits of a pistol AR is known and of great importance when it comes to CCW licensing covering it as well as traveling between states.

Putting your cheek on a bare buffer tube will put your eyes too low to use most types of sights. And that is why some like to put foam on the buffer tube to give a raised cheek rest. Now raising you head enough to use sights and resting your jaw onto the buffer tube is very easy to do.

Now I will have to reread the Factoring Criteria document again to double check what it says about using a cheek weld on the buffer tube. IIRC, they stated that indicates using two hands to shoot and designed as a rifle. Again I will have to dig through the document again.

 

[BreechFace]

Putting your cheek on a bare buffer tube will put your eyes too low to use most types of sights. And that is why some like to put foam on the buffer tube to give a raised cheek rest. Now raising you head enough to use sights and resting your jaw onto the buffer tube is very easy to do.

If you watch the link to Demonstrated Concepts and find one of his shooting drills you will see that he utilizes reflex/red dot unlimited eye relief optics on a high mount. Now in reading the ATF guidelines they are not going to allow a "short eye relief" scope on a pistol, as that would, require the person to shoulder the weapon to put their eyes in the correct eye relief.

IIRC, they stated that indicates using two hands to shoot and designed as a rifle. Again I will have to dig through the document again.

Do all ATF agents shoot their Glocks one handed? Maybe we should gather some pictures of them handling their Glocks with two hands. This is the route they went in gathering YouTube, marketing pictures and social media pictures to promote their tyranny.

So am I going to be creating an SBR when utilizing a support hand shooting my Glock 48 carry pistol?

But I guess they would simply say that they are not subject to the same laws as us peasants.

Two words for the ATF on this matter...DUMPSTER FIRE.

 

[12Bravo20]

@BreechFace

When I talk about shooting a pistol with two hands, I am using the official legal definition of a pistol which is defined by the 1934 NFA, 1968 GCA and all other pertinent federal laws concerning firearms. And the ATF has specified that legal definition of a pistol through out the Factoring Criteria document. And on the flip side of that is how the ATF mentions serval times about "firearms" that are over 26" OAL are automatically a SBR or SBS if a brace is attached since they have always been designed to shoot using two hands.

When the ATF states "designed to shoot with one hand" or "designed to shoot with two hands" they are talking about hand placement on the firearm.

The old argument of "but everyone uses two hands to shoot pistols" is not relevant in this case. Again it is about hand placement. rifles and others that are classified as "firearms" are design to be shot with one hand on the grip to pull the trigger and the other hand placed far forward to support the gun while shooting. This is NOT required when shooting a pistol.


Here is the legal definition of a pistol per federal law.

18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(29) and 27 CFR § 478.11

The term “Pistol” means a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having:

• a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s);
• and a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).

Which can be found here: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...on-firearms-gun-control-act-definition-pistol

Again, the ATF is using the strict definition of a pistol within the Factoring Criteria document. Just as they are using the strict (and legal) definitions of a rifle and Short Barrel Rifle.

 

[BreechFace]

@12Bravo20

Thank you for that link. In this link will the use of a pistol AR be verboten to be used with two hands because of the following verbiage:

The term “Pistol” means a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having:​

Given that the AR was first designed as a rifle and in it's design was expressly thought to be used with two hands; will any attempt by John Q. Public to have a compliant pistol AR and want to use two hands run afoul with the ATF?

Even though it is possible to utilize a pistol AR with one hand and fire it, but it is in no way effective.



So is my thinking flawed that I will be able to utilize two hands on my AR Pistol that has the following characteristics?

1. Less than 26" OAL, how does this rule get affected when one installs a quick attach suppressor that takes it out past 26" OAL?
2. Short smooth pistol buffer tube (https://www.strikeindustries.com/si-ar-spre-slick.html) This should fall into the 6 - 6-1/2" range.
3. No short eye relief scope (as per their rules would require a shouldering of the pistol to get the eyes in correct alignment), I will utilize and unlimited eye relief optic such as a red dot or reflex on a high mount suitable for cheek weld shooting.

I will be utilizing two hands one being on the pistol grip, the support hand on the frame of the weapon that surrounds the barrel. How are they going to specify how one uses the support hand on a pistol AR? This has far reaching implications in "pistols" other than AR pistols.

This ruling has been written in such a way that it provides more questions than answers, and that is on purpose. They want to be obtuse with this so that the ATF has great latitude in it's application in courts, and further rulings.

 

[Varminterror]

While I agree with your input, the following out of the ATF response is a concern. Wouldn’t put it past ATF to use that against AR pistol tubes with foam on them. Maybe I’m being paranoid….

View attachment 1128916

It’s established that non-functional extensions constitute the attachment which is now a “stock.” However, the buffer tube on an AR is a functional aspect of the firearm, and not an attachment.

 

[Varminterror]

@BreechFace - don’t convolute the letter of the pistol definition with this new ruling. We moved progressively away from “use dictates design” a long time ago.

What was a pistol before remains such - this clarification clarifies the definition of a rifle. Many pistols have been and remain to be pistols despite having opportunity to be fired with two hands in separated positions, and this doesn’t change that fact.

Frankly, it’s defensible that an AR pistol with a smooth tube and a rifle scope remains a pistol, as this ruling states the subsequent factors only apply when accompanying some rearward attachment which constitutes a stock.

 

[12Bravo20]

Frankly, it’s defensible that an AR pistol with a smooth tube and a rifle scope remains a pistol, as this ruling states the subsequent factors only apply when accompanying some rearward attachment which constitutes a stock.

Please reread the Factoring Criteria document. Because the ATF does indeed address using "rifle" scopes to any other type of optic or iron sights that have a short eye relief that can not be used easily if held at arms length.

So is my thinking flawed that I will be able to utilize two hands on my AR Pistol that has the following characteristics?

1. Less than 26" OAL, how does this rule get affected when one installs a quick attach suppressor that takes it out past 26" OAL?
2. Short smooth pistol buffer tube (https://www.strikeindustries.com/si-ar-spre-slick.html) This should fall into the 6 - 6-1/2" range.
3. No short eye relief scope (as per their rules would require a shouldering of the pistol to get the eyes in correct alignment), I will utilize and unlimited eye relief optic such as a red dot or reflex on a high mount suitable for cheek weld shooting.

To answer your questions here.

1. Any type of suppressor or other muzzle device is NOT counted towards overall length UNLESS they are permanently attached to the barrel by ATF approved means. So a quick attach suppressor would not change the overall length or classification of a pistol. NOTE that having a permanently attached suppressor on a SBR would require two tax stamps, one for the SBR and one for the suppressor.
2. Yes any short smooth buffer tube that does not have any areas machined into them to facilitate locking a brace or stock in place is fine as long as the overall length is between 6 and 6 1/2 inches. Here is the kicker though. The ATF has not stated how they take that measurement. If they measure from the back of the receiver to the end of the buffer tube then pistol buffer tubes will be at the maximum 6 1/2 inches. If they measure from the outside end of the castle nut to the end of the buffer tube then it will be 6 to 6 1/8 inches. Those are the measurements I got when measuring my pistol buffer tube.
3. Correct, the ATF states in the Factoring Criteria document that short eye relief optics (rifle scopes) would require shouldering of the pistol. So to be safe either a red dot with unlimited eye relief or a pistol specific scope is perfectly fine and legal to use on a braced pistol.

Hopefully I helped you better understand things. And as has been stated by actual FFL holders with SOT, this rule change actually helps to better define what a SBR is. No most don't like the rule but it is what it is and SBR's have been regulated since 1934.

 

[Varminterror]

Please reread the Factoring Criteria document. Because the ATF does indeed address using "rifle" scopes to any other type of optic or iron sights that have a short eye relief that can not be used easily if held at arms length.

Please make a better attempt to UNDERSTAND the factoring criteria.

The issue of short eye relief sights/scopes ONLY applies when a rearward attachment which is now deemed to constitute a stock is present.

Putting a rifle scope on top of a pistol with no stock, no rearward, non-functioning attachment, does not make an SBR, the same as it always has not, because a firearm without any form of stock cannot be a rifle, hence cannot be a SBR.

If something which could be considered a stock isn’t present, the section 2 article iii does not apply.



The scoresheet was thrown out, so we’re not doing the game where independent features could be incorrectly determined to be design intent for a shoulder fired arm.

 

[12Bravo20]

Varminterror you just love to be correct and to also to correct others no matter what. But that's okay. You be you.

And YES the factoring Criteria does state that a short eye relief scope indicates that a firearm is designed to be shouldered - which makes a pistol a SBR if a brace or anything else is present that gives enough surface area to shoulder. The way the Factoring Criteria is written, the ATF can say that a tennis ball or cane tip added to the end of a buffer tube along with a rifle scope makes it a SBR.

Same goes if you have a "rifle" scope AND a bare buffer tube that is over 6 1/2 inches long which can be considered a SBR.