Ok so apparently they made the federal registry today and millions of law abiding citizens will be felons in 120 days.so here's the thing, all the hubbub is about braces, braces, braces...why are they so dead set on banning braces? If they really don't want people to have SBR's then why wouldn't they just ban the short uppers? You can buy short uppers everywhere. They're banning the back end of the gun when the front end of the gun is what makes it a "short barreled rifle". Doesn't make any sense to me.so if you bought a lower with a brace on it, your a criminal, but if you bought a short upper which with the push of a pin can be connected to ANY upper that doesn't matter....

It’s just going to be another form of revenue for them. My guess is 200 dollar tax stamp for “braced firearms”. The government has been burning money, this is just a quick cash grab.

you actually became a Felon Yesterday if you own one , they just won't prosecute you for 120 days.

they did state yesterday when they posted the final ruling to the national registry that removing the brace and destroying it and or making it so it can not be re-installed

they are making 20-40 million people felons

they want a registry

no the brace has nothing to do with making it safe or safety or public safety

back up for a little history in 1934 intention was to ban handguns as well , that is why the short barrel rifle and shotgun were also listed , the politicians thought if they were banning handguns then people would just cut down shotguns and rifles to make them easier to carry
also the lenght of a barrel on all these guns had to be 18 inches

in 1936 congress decided that 22rimfires could have a 16 inch barrel because it had been brough to their attention how many people they had made felons then for owning the most common 22 rifles around.

in 1968 after the US army had sold many thousand M1 carbine rifles through the NRA they realized they were illegally selling SBRs 17 3/4 inch barrels on the M1 carbine made them SBR's so they made all rifles 16 inches and left shotguns 18

also shortly after 1934 they realized a lot of popular shotguns with short barrels were around so they offered a 5 dollar registration as an AOW any other weapon as long as it was manufactured with a short barrel.

in 1934 a suppressor was 3-7 dollars and the tax was fully intended to be prohibitive at 200 dollars that was the price of a new car at the time approximately a 400% tax

intentionally prohibitive.

so they changed it 3 times with congress

now they want to just create any registry they can and

a braced pistol can be carried with a CCL/CCP in most states loaded. and ready to use
and can go across state lines like any other pistol.
BUT to move a SBR that you have legally registered you need to file a form 22 every time you intend to leave your home state with it
also there are a bunch of states that prohibit all SBR
so they in one ban of a firearms accessory they kill all the great truck guns
they make it so you can't move them across state lines legally with out paperwork filed
and they make it a rifle not a pistol.

that is what it is about how can they punish people

If it was just that , but they are deferring the tax to get people to comply with registration.
they also made it so you HAVE to take pictures to get the "free" tax stamp incriminating yourself for having one should they decide that they no longer want to use their judgement on who to prossicute.


if you file an form 1 and pay 200 dollars the standard way then you don't have to take a picture , this is the way normal form 1s work you can not build it till you have tax stamp in hand.

Pete I get what your saying, but I guess my point is it just doesn't add up. So they say you can remove the brace and destroy it, ok, so you you do that, now you have just a buffer tube on a reciever with a sub legal barrel, is that legal or illegal? Or... you keep the brace on the lower and remove the under 16" barreled upper and put a regular length ( over 16") upper on it, is that legal?

If you also have an upper that is 16" or longer you do not have to destroy the brace, because it would be legal on the longer barreled upper, but it must be removed from the shorty. and you can legally own an AR pistol with a bare buffer tube

It's the ability to use the arm brace to shoulder the firearm and use it as a rifle that creates the issue. It's not the length of barrel. Pistols with folding stocks to allow shouldering like a rifle are treated the same way (ie: as a SBR).

IMO, anyone who didn't see this coming from the very start was kidding themself. BATFE helped that along with confusing policy letters suggesting they might accept braces as being just braces, but the configurations so obviously facilitated use from the shoulder that it could never stand. The right answer would be for congress to pass legislation dropping SBRs from special treatment and the associated tax but that just isn't going to happen.

the ATF and logic are mutually excusive

as of 1/13 it was not clear if it was legal or not legal to just remove and destroy the brace , right before they filed it in the national registry 1/31 they stated that removal and destruction of the brace and just a buffer tube even if it was a carbine buffer tube a stock could fit on was acceptable.

because the brace that they said for a decade was not a stock , now was a stock in their new definition despite all the letters in writing and submitted samples that they tested and said were not stocks.

if you have a 16 inch barrel on your braced pistol it does not constitute a short barreled rifle , that may sound funny I actually have one, built a 300 black out pistol to hunt a WI pistol and shotgun only zone , it fit in the definition of a pistol still although it may not any longer because a brace now constitutes a stock.

pistols can become rifles but rifles may not become pistols

so if you purchased a "other" lower and built it first as a pistol it can become a rifle , but if you built it first as a rifle it can not become a pistol.

never mind the background check was identical on an other no matter if you built it first as a pistol or a rifle.

they took 293 pages in the first rev 1/13 to try and explain something that should fit on a single sheet of paper 8.5x11

several laweres sat down to read it and still couldn't make much sense of it

almost 300 pages to be ambigus at best



not the issue , is having a short barrel where you could attach it to a stocked lower still possession ?

so you have 2 short barrel guns pistols you remove the braces from and make say you destroy them

but you have that 3rd gun with a 16 inch barrel and a brace can that brace live in the gun cabinet with the 2 guns with short barrels and no brace?

it probably makes more sense to also remove that brace and put it to a stock just to avoid any possibility it could be considered that it could be attached , but it could all change with their next document.

they have changed and put in writing so many times changes , they even at one point put in writing it was legal to shoulder a pistol brace just a few years ago.

it is all subject their interpretation and the day

as for the "you should have seen this coming " well yes any government ever is subject to corruption and tyranny and they did see this coming over 200 years ago.

It is just another chip chip chip at the 2A. 1 small bite at a time.

Seems funny to me that all the tough guys who claimed they didn't have any guns due to a boating accident are suddenly worried about guns again.

How bout this. I dont care what government agencies are monitoring my post. Molon Labe. Come Take it !!!!!

The old adage about "How do you boil a frog" holds very true here.

Ttt

This^^^

Pretty sure they know this will die under review. But even if it gets killed they aren't going to dump the records. This is a registry scheme plain and simple.

Mike