pistol brace overturned?

[bearcreek]

Ah, but that return to pistol configuration after being rebarreled would in reality be converting a 'rifle' to a pistol...........should anyone know of it. Like the man said: "Do what you're gonna do with due regard to the cop around the corner".

Which is perfectly legal, as long as the weapon started life as a pistol.

 

[dogtown tom]

If you return your SBR to a standard configuration, does it stay registered with the ATF?

ATF asks, but does not require, that you notify them when any change to an SBR is permanent. They will not delete the Registry, just make a notation that the firearm is no longer in NFA configuration.

 

[dogtown tom]

Ah, but that return to pistol configuration after being rebarreled would in reality be converting a 'rifle' to a pistol...........should anyone know of it. Like the man said: "Do what you're gonna do with due regard to the cop around the corner".

I don't know who that man is, but he didn't read ATF Ruling 2011-4 - Pistols Configured from Rifles; Rifles Configured from Pistols

 

[usaral63]

Your are right, I wrong. Thanks for the updateQ

 

[Balrog]

Yes. If you do that though, you can then cross state lines without notifying them.

So could you take an SBR AR, swap a 16" upper for travel, cross state lines with it 16" barrel, and then once across the state line, swap it back to the SBR upper? I assume that would be illegal because you end up in another state with an SBR?

 

[dogtown tom]

So could you take an SBR AR, swap a 16" upper for travel, cross state lines with it 16" barrel, and then once across the state line, swap it back to the SBR upper? I assume that would be illegal because you end up in another state with an SBR?

No. You leave the short barrel at home.
Having the short bbl in your possession whether attached or not is "constructive possession" of an SBR.

 

[hso]

ask a lawyer.

Perhaps, "No one knows here so consult a professional " would have been implied by "ask a lawyer", but ...no one knows for certain.

 

[Balrog]

No. You leave the short barrel at home.
Having the short bbl in your possession whether attached or not is "constructive possession" of an SBR.

So really as long as the brace rule doesn't go into effect, you are better off to have a braced pistol, which you can legally transport across state lines, than an SBR?

 

[bearcreek]

So really as long as the brace rule doesn't go into effect, you are better off to have a braced pistol, which you can legally transport across state lines, than an SBR?

Correct. That was one of the primary advantages of a braced "pistol" over an SBR.

 

[dogtown tom]

So really as long as the brace rule doesn't go into effect, you are better off to have a braced pistol, which you can legally transport across state lines, than an SBR?

You can legally transport an SBR across state lines. You just send in an ATF form every year.

Application to Transport Interstate or to Temporarily Export Certain National Firearms Act (NFA) Firearms

 

[bearcreek]

Perhaps, "No one knows here so consult a professional " would have been implied by "ask a lawyer", but ...no one knows for certain.

I'm not quite sure I follow you. No one knows what for certain? What I was saying is that it doesn't make sense for a quarter of a million people to all hire lawyers to answer the exact same question.

 

[Styx]

So really as long as the brace rule doesn't go into effect, you are better off to have a braced pistol, which you can legally transport across state lines, than an SBR?

As already stated, you can legally transport a SBR across state lines ONLY if it's legal to have SBRs or even "assault weapons" in whichever state you're traveling to.

 

[old lady new shooter]

You just send in an ATF form every year.

You don't have to ask every time?

 

[bearcreek]

You can legally transport an SBR across state lines. You just send in an ATF form every year.

Application to Transport Interstate or to Temporarily Export Certain National Firearms Act (NFA) Firearms

I thought it was for each trip? Given that you have to specify where you're going and the dates, it doesn't seem possible to do it only once a year, unless you're only going across state lines once a year.

 

[dogtown tom]

I thought it was for each trip? Given that you have to specify where you're going and the dates, it doesn't seem possible to do it only once a year, unless you're only going across state lines once a year.

You submit a form for each state, with the dates less than a year apart.
For example, traveling Texas to Arkansas. I would put 1/1/2024-12/31/2024.
Traveling "from" and "to"..........your current address and any destination you could go to in Arkansas. The form has a "to" address, but you aren't restricted to traveling only to that address. You could put your "to" as Texarkana, AR, then lawfully continue to travel to Little Rock or Fayetteville.. The form also allows multiple trips during that time period.

I have a customer who is a long haul truck driver. He's had an SBR in his cab for the last decade. Every year he'll sit down and fill out forms for the states he'll be traveling to. I think he picks a gun range in each of those states. (no, he doesn't travel to ban states).

 

[JERRY]

In the past I've asked for someone with the legalese to restate these rulings in layman's terms. This forum however seems to be less of a community than I thought when I get the pay a lawyer schpiel.

 

[Styx]

In the past I've asked for someone with the legalese to restate these rulings in layman's terms. This forum however seems to be less of a community than I thought when I get the pay a lawyer schpiel.

Got to go to a different community/forum for that unfortunately.

 

[LiveLife]

In the past I've asked for someone with the legalese to restate these rulings in layman's terms. This forum however seems to be less of a community than I thought when I get the pay a lawyer schpiel.

Got to go to a different community/forum for that unfortunately.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just a layperson posting on THR

Yes, I agree and why THR has two communities/subforums: Legal and General.

At the top of the "Legal" subforum, rules for posting are clearly bannered - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/thr-legal-forum-guidelines-read-before-posting.796448/

In the Legal Forum we try to understand what the law is (including court decisions and proposed laws), how it works, and how it applies to RKBA issues. We focus on the way things are – not the way we think they should be. However, nothing in the Legal Forum is intended to be, nor should it be considered, legal advice. (Be sure to read: THR Legal Forum Guidelines: Read Before Posting)​

And the "Legal Forum Guidelines" says this:

• The Legal Forum is now for legal issues only. When giving advice, please endeavor to provide links or references to original documents, laws and other relevant resources.

I too ran into similar frustrating issue in years past when seeking "layperson" understanding of anti-2A laws/regulations as my posts kept getting deleted/edited by moderators on subforums outside of "General".

After some PMs with moderators, I understood "Legal" and other subforums exist to provide clear black and white factual content with direct links to legal filings so as to eliminate speculation/opinions.

So since, I have posted my "layperson" discussions and opinion sharing on "General" subforum but provide links to direct legal filings and press releases from plaintiffs/2A organizations whenever I can ... And just like that, my posts no longer get deleted/edited with moderator commentary - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-14#post-12677350

pistol brace overturned? ... someone with the legalese to restate these rulings in layman's terms. This forum however seems to be less of a community

Pose your same request for "layperson terms of rulings" in General and you will likely receive THR community "layperson" response, like this thread on Pistol Brace lawsuits - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-pistol-brace-rule-lawsuits.920838/

As long as your posts are not political and stay on topic to 2A/RKBA, no issues ... And to answer your question, yes for now.

And if you want to talk politics (Or any other topics), you can post here - https://notechtyranny.com/index.php?threads/dead-in-here.321/#post-9438

Peace.

 

[JERRY]

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just a layperson posting on THR

Yes, I agree and why THR has two communities/subforums: Legal and General.

At the top of the "Legal" subforum, rules for posting are clearly bannered - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/thr-legal-forum-guidelines-read-before-posting.796448/

In the Legal Forum we try to understand what the law is (including court decisions and proposed laws), how it works, and how it applies to RKBA issues. We focus on the way things are – not the way we think they should be. However, nothing in the Legal Forum is intended to be, nor should it be considered, legal advice. (Be sure to read: THR Legal Forum Guidelines: Read Before Posting)​

And the "Legal Forum Guidelines" says this:

• The Legal Forum is now for legal issues only. When giving advice, please endeavor to provide links or references to original documents, laws and other relevant resources.

I too ran into similar frustrating issue in years past when seeking "layperson" understanding of anti-2A laws/regulations (Believe me, I worked as federally certified and state licensed health facilities surveyor which do not expire and know my way around Code of Federal Regulations and very familiar with CA Titles (Particularly Title 22) along with Health & Safety Codes and was even recruited to office where CA regulations are written but unfortunately office was temporarily shut down due to budget/funding issue prior to starting my work there); but my posts kept getting deleted/edited by moderators on subforums outside of "General".

After some PMs with moderators, I understood "Legal" and other subforums exist to provide clear black and white factual content with direct links to legal filings so as to eliminate speculation/opinions.

So since, I have posted my "layperson" discussions and opinion sharing on "General" subforum but provide links to direct legal filings and press releases from plaintiffs/2A organizations whenever I can ... And just like that, my posts no longer get deleted/edited with moderator commentary - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-14#post-12677350


Pose your same request for "layperson terms of rulings" in General and you will likely receive THR community "layperson" response, like this thread on Pistol Brace lawsuits - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-pistol-brace-rule-lawsuits.920838/

As long as your posts are not political and stay on topic to 2A/RKBA, no issues ... And to answer your question, yes for now.

And if you want to talk politics (Or any other topics), you can post here - https://notechtyranny.com/index.php?threads/dead-in-here.321/#post-9438

Peace.

Understood. However I'm not asking for a legal opinion, rather to have rulings (for whatever they are) explained in a more basic way. Not opinion not interpretation, just simpler wording.

 

[dogtown tom]

Understood. However I'm not asking for a legal opinion, rather to have rulings (for whatever they are) explained in a more basic way. Not opinion not interpretation, just simpler wording.

Huh?
"simpler wording" IS interpretation.

 

[LiveLife]

Understood. However I'm not asking for a legal opinion, rather to have rulings (for whatever they are) explained in a more basic way

OK, just for you from post #11 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/pistol-brace-overturned.923707/#post-12754591

Great news!

Nationwide injunction issued - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ace-rule-lawsuits.920838/page-4#post-12754567

"Fifth Circuit has already decided that the Final Rule violates the APA" ... (Bruen) ... public safety concerns must be addressed in ways that are lawful. This Rule is not.​

Conclusion ... For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Motion and STAYS the Rule in its entirety.​

With online dictionary help (Translation in parenthesis):

Great news! (No translation needed)​

Nationwide injunction (A court order requiring ATF to refrain from enforcing pistol brace rule) issued.​

Conclusion ... For the foregoing (Previous) reasons, the Court GRANTS (To allow something requested) the Motion (Written or oral application made to court for ruling) and STAYS (Temporarily stopping) the Rule (ATF pistol brace rule) in its entirety (Entire thing).​

​

I hope this helps ... Forgive me lawyers if I butchered my "translation" of the nationwide injunction ruling.

 

[JERRY]

OK, just for you from post #11 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/pistol-brace-overturned.923707/#post-12754591


With online dictionary help (Translation in parenthesis):

Great news! (No translation needed)​

Nationwide injunction (A court order requiring ATF to refrain from enforcing pistol brace rule) issued.​

Conclusion ... For the foregoing (Previous) reasons, the Court GRANTS (To allow something requested) the Motion (Written or oral application made to court for ruling) and STAYS (Temporarily stopping) the Rule (ATF pistol brace rule) in its entirety (Entire thing).​

​

I hope this helps ... Forgive me lawyers if I butchered my "translation" of the nationwide injunction ruling.

You're a riot Alice, but I get what you mean

 

[lilguy]

Any one know if a pistol brace is considered an assault weapon attachment
subject to state controls?

 

[Styx]

Any one know if a pistol brace is considered an assault weapon attachment
subject to state controls?

Depends on your state. Go talk to a lawyer lol.

 

[Spats McGee]

Perhaps, "No one knows here so consult a professional " would have been implied by "ask a lawyer", but ...no one knows for certain.

I'm not quite sure I follow you. No one knows what for certain? What I was saying is that it doesn't make sense for a quarter of a million people to all hire lawyers to answer the exact same question.

In the past I've asked for someone with the legalese to restate these rulings in layman's terms. This forum however seems to be less of a community than I thought when I get the pay a lawyer schpiel.

Understood. However I'm not asking for a legal opinion, rather to have rulings (for whatever they are) explained in a more basic way. Not opinion not interpretation, just simpler wording.

For those of you who don't like the "ask a lawyer" answer, I'll offer this: In Legal, we try to stick to specific statutes, cases, etc., and we answer what we can. The lawyers here can't answer this one. I give no guarantees that my memory serves me well, as I'm swamped at work and haven't had time to dig into this, but if it does ... there are a couple of brace cases out there, one of which purports to have a nationwide injunction in place, there's just no way I could tell each one of you what all of that means for you without "getting down on the gnat's eye" for your specific case. I'd need a client consultation with each of you to figure out what you've got and what you intend to do with it, and then I'd need to dig down into both federal law and your state's law to look at the interplay between federal law and your state's law to see what it all means for each of you individually. There are several problems with this: (1) I don't have time to do that; (2) I sure don't have time to do it for free; and (3) I'm probably not licensed in your jurisdiction. I'm not interested in getting popped for the unauthorized practice of law in your state, nor am I interested in committing legal malpractice in a way that sends one of y'all to prison.