Tailhook pistol brace passes or fails the test?

[Elkins45]

This is a Tailhook AR pistol brace. It’s hard plastic and has a folding hook that goes under the forearm to add support. It’s adjustable for length of pull and can essentially be adjusted to be similar in length to a regular adjustable carbine stock.


Because of the adjustable length and the surface area it seems to me this particular ‘brace’ fails the proposed new ATF test and would need a stamp if installed on a gun with a < 16” barrel, but I had a conversation with a gun dealer this week who told me ATF had explicitly stated the Tailhook passes the test and is a brace, not a back door SBR. Googling fails to deny or confirm this. Is this just another example of a dealer not knowing what he’s talking about or am I just out of the loop?

 

[The_Quartermaster]

If I was into short loophole rifles, I'd get the Vltor A5 pistol extension and have no brace at all on it. Problem solved until it too becomes a blip on the radar. I've taken the stock off of my SBR and made hits standing out to 100 yards. Not the best but not the worst either.

Or if living in a free state, SBR it. If wanting to take out of state, get the shortest barrel and longest MD that's suitable for your needs and P&W to the legal 16" and be hassle free. Just my opinion though.

 

[Hoser]

If you roll the dice, dont be surprised when you lose.

Far simpler to just SBR your lower. No grey area or "what if" thinking to use brain cells.

 

[Elkins45]

If you roll the dice, dont be surprised when you lose.

Far simpler to just SBR your lower. No grey area or "what if" thinking to use brain cells.

I already have several SBRs.

A SBR requires ATF permission to cross state lines and is illegal in some states. Like it or not the ‘pistol’ loophole has some value. I live close enough to a couple of state borders that I don’t want to be an accidental felon because of what I have in the trunk.

 

[GarrettJ]

I already have several SBRs.

A SBR requires ATF permission to cross state lines and is illegal in some states. Like it or not the ‘pistol’ loophole has some value. I live close enough to a couple of state borders that I don’t want to be an accidental felon because of what I have in the trunk.

Your profile says you’re in KY. SBRs can be legally possessed in every bordering state, including IL.

File your travel papers every year for a 365 day duration. You’re now good to go.

 

[dogtown tom]

.........I had a conversation with a gun dealer this week who told me ATF had explicitly stated the Tailhook passes the test and is a brace, not a back door SBR....

Currently its an arm brace.
Once the new regs come into effect you'll need to calculate using the worksheet.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

I already have several SBRs.

A SBR requires ATF permission to cross state lines and is illegal in some states. Like it or not the ‘pistol’ loophole has some value. I live close enough to a couple of state borders that I don’t want to be an accidental felon because of what I have in the trunk.

Take off the brace and use a smooth featureless extension, and you won't have to risk being a victimless felon.

And pistol category short rifles are also illegal in some states as well, including even certain legal lengths if they have certain features.

 

[gotboostvr]

If I was into short loophole rifles, I'd get the Vltor A5 pistol extension and have no brace at all on it. Problem solved until it too becomes a blip on the radar. I've taken the stock off of my SBR and made hits standing out to 100 yards. Not the best but not the worst either.

Or if living in a free state, SBR it. If wanting to take out of state, get the shortest barrel and longest MD that's suitable for your needs and P&W to the legal 16" and be hassle free. Just my opinion though.

I just put a folder on my 16" as in most cases other than storage or transport I'd prefer a 16" barrel anyways.

If you want it short while deployed, that's a whole other question and solution though to be fair.

Edited to add, I did have a tailhook previously on a CZ Scorpion EVO and liked it very much. Moreso than any other brace I've used. It was actually useful and easy to employ as intended.

 

[mcb]

At this point I am simply waiting until after the ATF comes out with their new ruling and any immediately resulting legal challenges before I change my current pistol or plan any new ones. Once the new ruling is announced we will have at least 120 days to come into compliance and be able to make realistic plans for future builds. Trying to second guess what is or is not in the coming change seems rather pointless at the moment.

 

[12Bravo20]

At this point I am simply waiting until after the ATF comes out with their new ruling and any immediately resulting legal challenges before I change my current pistol or plan any new ones. Once the new ruling is announced we will have at least 120 days to come into compliance and be able to make realistic plans for future builds. Trying to second guess what is or is not in the coming change seems rather pointless at the moment.

I am doing the exact same with my AR pistols too. I'll make a decision once the rule change actually gets published. Until then, I am leaving them as they are.

 

[Havok7416]

Your profile says you’re in KY. SBRs can be legally possessed in every bordering state, including IL.

File your travel papers every year for a 365 day duration. You’re now good to go.

The problem is, you can't (legally) transport an SBR across state lines without filling out a permission slip. Elkins (and me for that matter) live close enough to a variety of borders that an SBR can be a bit of a pain with respect to transportation.

ETA: I just tried to fill out the form for a year. They now have a section on the form for the exact dates you will be at the property listed.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

The problem is, you can't (legally) transport an SBR across state lines without filling out a permission slip. Elkins (and me for that matter) live close enough to a variety of borders that an SBR can be a bit of a pain with respect to transportation.

Assemble another lower using just a smooth pistol extension. Take off any eval features on the SBR'ed upper and mate to the pistol lower when crossing lines. Done.

 

[Havok7416]

Assemble another lower using just a smooth pistol extension. Take off any eval features on the SBR'ed upper and mate to the pistol lower when crossing lines. Done.

That is a more much more expensive way to get to what Elkins mentioned (swapping the SBR stock for a brace) but it certainly is an option. Like @Elkins45 I swap to a brace when going out of state. Depending on the ATF statement to be made in December this may or may not be a viable option going forward.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

That is a more much more expensive way to get to what Elkins mentioned (swapping the SBR stock for a brace) but it certainly is an option. Like @Elkins45 I swap to a brace when going out of state. Depending on the ATF statement to be made in December this may or may not be a viable option going forward.

You cannot swap a stock for a brace on a registered lower and take it out of state as a pistol. First you'd have to have it removed from the register.

And for this price, an already assembled pistol lower cheaper than the Tailhook Mod 2 that the OP's choice for a brace. Your math in costs does not check out here.

https://andersonmanufacturing.com/am-15-complete-lower-pistol-open.html

 

[Havok7416]

You cannot swap a stock for a brace on a registered lower and take it out of state as a pistol. First you'd have to have it removed from the register.

And for this price, an already assembled pistol lower cheaper than the Tailhook Mod 2 that the OP's choice for a brace. Your math in costs does not check out here.

https://andersonmanufacturing.com/am-15-complete-lower-pistol-open.html

I have no idea what the listed brace sells for but I do know what my brace cost me. If you can acquire a lower for less money than a brace, absolutely that makes sense. In my case though it would be much harder to source a "lower" since my SBR is not an AR.

 

[GarrettJ]

ETA: I just tried to fill out the form for a year. They now have a section on the form for the exact dates you will be at the property listed.

ATF only has transport jurisdiction when you cross between states. You don’t need to list multiple locations within a state. Once in a given state, they have no say until you cross state lines again.

ATF has a habit of making requesting things that are not in the law. These are requests, not requirements.

I file a 5320.20 for my NFA stuff every year for any state that I even remotely think I may want to travel to in the coming year. I send in a big packet every year. Obviously, I am showing the same guns in multiple states during the same time frame. They still get approved.

In the “reason for transport” box I list “multiple trips to [state] for informal shooting and to participate in sporting events”, or something to that effect. But I do say multiple trips during the listed timeframe. Again, no problem getting them approved.

This method has worked for me for the past 20+ years.

 

[mcb]

ATF only has transport jurisdiction when you cross between states. You don’t need to list multiple locations within a state. Once in a given state, they have no say until you cross state lines again.

ATF has a habit of making requesting things that are not in the law. These are requests, not requirements.

I file a 5320.20 for my NFA stuff every year for any state that I even remotely think I may want to travel to in the coming year. I send in a big packet every year. Obviously, I am showing the same guns in multiple states during the same time frame. They still get approved.

In the “reason for transport” box I list “multiple trips to [state] for informal shooting and to participate in sporting events”, or something to that effect. But I do say multiple trips during the listed timeframe. Again, no problem getting them approved.

This method has worked for me for the past 20+ years.

I realize that the 5320.20 is fairly straight forward and relatively easy to do but you do have to do it or you can get in trouble. What a PITA. I can cross state lines with my pistol and suppressor without uncle Sam's blessing and if I can avoid the SBR hoops I will just so I don't have to ask permission to take my SBR with me when I travel. I get its easy but it should not be required at all! The libertarian in me resents carrying a copy of my suppressor tax stamp with me when I take my suppressor out for use.

 

[Elkins45]

Currently its an arm brace.
Once the new regs come into effect you'll need to calculate using the worksheet.

I understand that. My issue is that the worksheet is more than a little subjective. I’m not really sure how many points a particular design scores when measured by an ATF agent.

This FFL very specifically said ATF had blessed the Tailhook. I’m at about 80% confidence he was talking out of his butt, but so far none of the responses here have helped actually answer the question. I would think if ATF had made such a statement there would be some confirmation out there in cyberspace, but so far nothing has provided any additional clarity.

 

[dogtown tom]

I understand that. My issue is that the worksheet is more than a little subjective. I’m not really sure how many points a particular design scores when measured by an ATF agent.

I wouldn't trust that worksheet one bit. It's poorly designed, confusing and open to individual interpretation. I would love to get ten ATF IOI or Agents to individually calculate points on just five guns. I have no doubt that there will be ten different outcomes on each gun.

This FFL very specifically said ATF had blessed the Tailhook. I’m at about 80% confidence he was talking out of his butt, but so far none of the responses here have helped actually answer the question. I would think if ATF had made such a statement there would be some confirmation out there in cyberspace, but so far nothing has provided any additional clarity.

ATF issued a determination on the Tailhook brace in 2017:https://www.gearheadworks.com/approval-letters/ Any determination letters issued by ATF are worthless when the new regulation takes effect.
They most certainly have not issued any sort of blessing, ruling or determination as to whether the Tailhook will pass the proposed regulation because they can't.
Why not?
1. ATF quit issuing determinations several years ago unless a complete firearm was submitted.
2. The impending regulation is impending....can't give your "blessing" as to whether the Tailhook will pass because the regulation is on ice.
3. Because the Worksheet requires a firearm attached to the proposed brace to begin point calculation. Your AR pistol may be different length or weight than someone elses. It may be possible for some braces to be compliant when attached to one firearm and not compliant when attached to another pistol.

 

[GarrettJ]

I realize that the 5320.20 is fairly straight forward and relatively easy to do but you do have to do it or you can get in trouble. What a PITA.

Yeah, I know. I filled out the form once and emailed it in. Then I just update the date each year and send it in again.

I’ve probably spent more time writing this response that what it takes me to file a 5320.20 for travel all next year.

 

[mcb]

Yeah, I know. I filled out the form once and emailed it in. Then I just update the date each year and send it in again.

I’ve probably spent more time writing this response that what it takes me to file a 5320.20 for travel all next year.

My objection is not so much the time to fill the form out as much as it is the fact that I have to fill out a form and ask the government's permission to be allowed to travel with and use my property in another state. None of their business.

 

[12Bravo20]

I wouldn't trust that worksheet one bit. It's poorly designed, confusing and open to individual interpretation. I would love to get ten ATF IOI or Agents to individually calculate points on just five guns. I have no doubt that there will be ten different outcomes on each gun.


ATF issued a determination on the Tailhook brace in 2017:https://www.gearheadworks.com/approval-letters/ Any determination letters issued by ATF are worthless when the new regulation takes effect.
They most certainly have not issued any sort of blessing, ruling or determination as to whether the Tailhook will pass the proposed regulation because they can't.
Why not?
1. ATF quit issuing determinations several years ago unless a complete firearm was submitted.
2. The impending regulation is impending....can't give your "blessing" as to whether the Tailhook will pass because the regulation is on ice.
3. Because the Worksheet requires a firearm attached to the proposed brace to begin point calculation. Your AR pistol may be different length or weight than someone elses. It may be possible for some braces to be compliant when attached to one firearm and not compliant when attached to another pistol.

And to add to what dogtown tom posted. Here is what the ATF Worksheet 4999 states right at the top of the form:

NOTE:

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reserves the right to preclude classification as a pistol with a “stabilizing braces” for any firearm that achieves an apparent qualifying score but is an attempt to make a “short-barreled rifle” and circumvent the GCA or NFA

https://www.atf.gov/file/154866/download

So as you can plainly see, it really doesn't matter if a braced pistol passed the points test, the ATF can still say it is a SBR.

We can use my 9mm AR pistol as an example. If I would have used a flat top receiver with only a red dot sight, then it will pass easily. But since I used a fixed carry handle upper and front sight post, it might not pass at all according to the worksheet.

Here is the 9mm pistol

 

[N555]

The 4999 or whatever it is appears to be designed to make almost every AR piatol an sbr, even if you bought a popular model of AR pistol made by one of the biggest gun manufacturers, from dealer and haven't changed anything on it.
Since the ATF has an illegal searchable database of something like 900 million firearms transactions if I want a short barrel AR I'll just take a lower that's on a 4473 somewhere and make it an SBR so I can put a real stock on it.

 

[GarrettJ]

My objection is not so much the time to fill the form out as much as it is the fact that I have to fill out a form and ask the government's permission to be allowed to travel with and use my property in another state. None of their business.

Can’t help you there. I object to having to pay a transfer tax and wait up to a year or more to buy or build these. I object to not being allowed to build or buy new machine guns. I object to the mental gymnastics someone at ATF came up with to say be bringing my property across an imaginary line on a map for personal use is somehow “interstate commerce” (the only way the Feds can claim jurisdiction).

But I object to jail and fines as well. So while I don’t like it, I fill out the forms before traveling. But as noted, that’s one of the less onerous parts of this unconstitutional overreach.

If that’s more effort than you’re willing to expend after all the effort to get your NFA stuff, you can certainly leave it all home.

 

[giggitygiggity]

Currently its an arm brace.
Once the new regs come into effect you'll need to calculate using the worksheet.

This is the real answer. The worksheet isn’t about the brace itself, but the points accumulated as the firearm is configured in totality (brace features, sight features, etc.). Granted, the brace is what will generally cause the most points to be accumulated. It’s quite dumb and it’s very difficult to configure an AR pistol with a brace in any useable or acceptable configuration without accruing too many points. And that’s the point… the ATF can say, “we’re not saying you can’t own braces and we’re not saying that you can’t use braces either,” but in practicality, I suspect that most people will find that any braced pistol that meets the worksheet’s limitations is a very neutered version of today’s braced pistols and will likely just SBR it or run afoul of the rule.