Explain pistol braces
- Thread starter Axis II
- Start date
Outlaw75
Member
The National Firearms Act (1934) specifies a Short Barrel Rifle (SBR) as a buttstocked rifle with a barrel less than 16" and an overall length of less that 26". Possession of an SBR is only legal if the rifle is registered with the ATF and the owner has purchased an NFA tax stamp.
Only prison time (If you get caught without a NFA stamp.)
A brace is an uncomfortable, shorter than normal, stock substitute, that the ATF illegally classified as a stock.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
...and got their hand slapped (Britto v. ATF) and opened the door to more oversight into the ATF's over reach in other areas of American's lives.
Attachments
CapnMac
Member
Yeah, can't just go, well, we have decided [thing we don't like] when attached to a pistol is now a rifle. While ignoring that they had a list of C&R pistols with short, uncomfortable, stocks of dubious utility that were still legally pistols. All under some sort of presumption that, as enforcers of the rules, they could define the rules, too (Congress, whozzat?)
It's also important to remember that, at present, only enforcement of the new Rule is Stayed, until the case finishes deliberations in the 5th Circus (among all the other "vs ATFE" cases before the 5th).
I never found a proper brace uncomfortable. Yes it’s short, but so is the barrel. Choke up. You aren’t shooting 500 yards with a 10” barrel and a brace.
Also. You can transport a pistol across state lines without any hassle. A SBR legally is more difficult.
Also. You can transport a pistol across state lines without any hassle. A SBR legally is more difficult.
GunAdmirer
Member
I just put together a pistol a 6 weeks ago and do not find the brace uncomfortable or unwieldy to use. The design of the brace is important and should be considered carefully. I like it a lot.
mcb
Member
You guys know the LOP restriction was thrown out in court long before the current pistol brace legal battle started. There is no LOP maximum for a pistol brace codified anywhere, you can mount your brace on an extended receiver extension if you want a longer LOP.
Last edited:
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
It's essentially a legal work around the NFA's SBR requirements. I'm still shocked they ever approved it and sure as hell took advantage of it.
someguy2800
Member
It's essentially a legal work around the NFA's SBR requirements. I'm still shocked they ever approved it and sure as hell took advantage of it.
I love the color and the rail on that
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
That slim rail is probably the most comfortable I've ever handled. Truth be told, I'm a sucker for OD green and bought it for the color. Was originally a 7.5" 5.56 but after a few mags, it's now an 8.5" .300Blk. My eyebrows finally grew back.
I don't like when we use terms like "work around" or "loophole" to simply describe complying with the law. It sounds like we are doing something devious, and that is not the case. We are simply complying with federal law. The ATF had long ago ruled that pistol braces did not convert pistols into short barreled rifles. Then under Biden, they suddenly reversed their opinion and now say a braced pistol is short barelled rifle and has to be registered. This was done without Congress passing a new law! It is simply the federal bureaucracy deciding to legislate, and that is unconstitutional.It's essentially a legal work around the NFA's SBR requirements. I'm still shocked they ever approved it and sure as hell took advantage of it.
Captains1911
Member
You can legally put an upper with a barrel length of less than 16" on a lower that is registered as an SBR under the NFA. Or, until recently, you could legally put one on a lower that has a stabilizing arm brace (not a "stock") because the ATF considered that assembly to be a pistol, not a rifle. However, that latter is under current litigation and who knows what will come of it. There's way more to all of this but that's it in a nutshell.
Lennyjoe
Member
The brace was designed for handicapped shooters to be able to use the rifle one handed, or braced when unable to use off hand. It’s since been abused by people shouldering the rifle with the brace (in videos and photos), gaining ATF attention and causing them to react. The ATF’s attempt to criminalize millions of braced rifle owners failed. Tons of discussions on that outcome in the NFA forum.
mcb
Member
Remember the only reason that SBRs and SBSs are in the 1934 NFA was to close a perceived hole in the intended inclusion of handguns into the NFA. In the end to get it passed they removed handguns but "failed" to remember to remove the loophole closure. The proper answers to the pistol brace court issue is to remove SBR and SBS from the NFA. Pistol braces would go away overnight and the only ones using them would be people that need them due to a disability as originally intended.
Mark_Mark
Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2021
- Messages
- 17,953
Six Gun man with a AR & Suppressor!It's essentially a legal work around the NFA's SBR requirements. I'm still shocked they ever approved it and sure as hell took advantage of it.
my Hero right HERE!!!
Its not illegal for other equipment designed for the handicapped to be used by non-handicapped people. Totally legal for me to own and use a wheelchair for example.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
So it’s essentially a stock but has a strap to make it a brace?It's essentially a legal work around the NFA's SBR requirements. I'm still shocked they ever approved it and sure as hell took advantage of it.
Lennyjoe
Member
Agree, not illegal for anyone to have. My reference was to shouldering the brace and using like a stock……
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
That’s just using an accessory as not intended. Just like putting a scope on a revolver.
Lennyjoe
Member
Scope on a revolver doesn’t get ATF’s attention. Shouldering a brace did.
BreechFace
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,509
And now they’re being reminded they can’t just legislate our rights away afforded by the 2A.
