ATF 2021R-08: Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached “Stabilizing Braces”

[Timfoilhat]

What's with all the scope crap? Since when does a scope make something a rifle?

From thier position, a scope's eye relief determines the position from where the gun is fired. If you properly use a brace strapped to your arm a scope isn't useful to fire from the hip, nor is it useful with your arm extended. That shows the builder's intent to fire from the shoulder where the scope is useful.
The same is true of peep sights.

 

[bigfelipe]

From thier position, a scope's eye relief determines the position from where the gun is fired. If you properly use a brace strapped to your arm a scope isn't useful to fire from the hip, nor is it useful with your arm extended. That shows the builder's intent to fire from the shoulder where the scope is useful.
The same is true of peep sights.

What if you want a cheekweld? Don't have to shoulder for that. There's been scopes on AR pistols longer than braces have existed...

 

[Timfoilhat]

What if you want a cheekweld? Don't have to shoulder for that. There's been scopes on AR pistols longer than braces have existed...

So put it in your submission to them. It's not my proposal.
And if there's no brace, there's no issue as I understand it.

 

[IkeStarnes]

View attachment 341891

Nice thing about being the house, you get to redefine the rules of the game at any time with no consequences.

there might be consequences

 

[IkeStarnes]

Any
- non-adjustable blade (e.g. the original KAK) fitted with a strap (included by the OEM or as a user mod, since the proposed rule review process applies to the individual firearm as submitted to the BATFE),
- SB tactical friction-fit brace (e.g. SBM4, SB Mini), and
- non-telescoping tailhook-style brace is going to be three points or fewer under Section II, as it's written.

The newer adjustable braces that are basically stocks (rigid with tons of surface area and use the same carbine or PDW buffer tubes used on rifles, e.g. the SBA3, the SBPDW)... you can definitely see that those are the targets of the proposed rule.

The proposed rules are rewinding the clock to 2015-2016 for AR pistols. Pretty much any 7.5-10.5" AR pistol that has a SB15/SBM4/SB Mini/strapped Blade/original Tailhook brace conforms to the proposed point system so long as the pistol has a red dot on top. Same goes for Scorpions, AKs, and MP5 clones. So, if the rule goes through, a whole bunch of pistols won't need to be altered at all. Some will be, but it will be cheaper than the cost of a stamp to make those mods. A pistol buffer tube and pretty much any of the cheaper braces on the market will satisfy the points system. I can't really think of an AR pistol that would be banned or "California-neutered-into-uselessness" by the point system. They just won't have the highly-adjustable "not-a-stock" braces.

I DO NOT SUPPORT TO NFA OR THINK IT SHOULD BE LAW. That said, it is, until SCOTUS overturns it or Congress repeals it. As someone that's worked with manufacturers and distributors in the industry, they'll probably appreciate the certainty of the points system as opposed to investing risky capital in "grey areas" of the NFA.

until next time

 

[JRV]

What if you want a cheekweld? Don't have to shoulder for that. There's been scopes on AR pistols longer than braces have existed...

The rule doesn't appear to address cheekweld accessories like foam wraps, CAA saddles, and Thordsen cheek rests... just armbraces. If you scoped an AR pistol with no brace at all, it does not look like that falls under the point system. It would be no different than an XP100 or a Ruger Charger.

Since the proposed rule gives scopes 4 points, it looks like it's an "either/or" choice for braces.

 

[GymB]

The rule doesn't appear to address cheekweld accessories like foam wraps, CAA saddles, and Thordsen cheek rests... just armbraces. If you scoped an AR pistol with no brace at all, it does not look like that falls under the point system. It would be no different than an XP100 or a Ruger Charger.

Since the proposed rule gives scopes 4 points, it looks like it's an "either/or" choice for braces.

To fire with a cheekweld almost certainly requires that the firearm be held in two places, so not a pistol. If it has no brace or shoulder stock then not a rifle. Not sure what it is at that point although I’m pretty sure that someone here can tell me. It’s similar to the Contender with a 14” barrel, that forearm is there as a second contact point.

 

[JRV]

To fire with a cheekweld almost certainly requires that the firearm be held in two places, so not a pistol. If it has no brace or shoulder stock then not a rifle. Not sure what it is at that point although I’m pretty sure that someone here can tell me. It’s similar to the Contender with a 14” barrel, that forearm is there as a second contact point.

You've summed up pretty handily why federal laws are basically a game of "Whose Line Is It Anyway?," except improvising with the wrong prop can be randomly fatal.

 

[Sleazy P. Martini]

And if there's no brace, there's no issue as I understand it.

What makes you say that? Any "pistol" > 4 lbs and between 12" and 26" can hit 4 points without even any consideration of brace-related points.

 

[Timfoilhat]

What makes you say that? Any "pistol" > 4 lbs and between 12" and 26" can hit 4 points without even any consideration of brace-related points.

It's my understanding that ATF stated in their documents that one remedy is to remove and destroy the brace.

 

[Dale Gribble]

Missouri Governor Will Sign Bill Nullifying Federal Gun Laws: Spokeswoman

www.theepochtimes.com

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson will sign newly passed legislation that would ban state law enforcement agencies from enforcing new federal gun laws following proposed rulemaking from the Biden administration to regulate firearms with stabilizing braces.

According to Parson spokeswoman Kelli Jones, the Republican governor will sign the “Second Amendment Preservation Act,” which says that it is the duty of courts and law enforcement agencies in Missouri to protect the Second Amendment rights of citizens to keep and bear arms. It also declares federal laws that infringe on that right null.

👍

 

[GymB]

What makes you say that? Any "pistol" > 4 lbs and between 12" and 26" can hit 4 points without even any consideration of brace-related points.

Yes, but if it doesn’t have a brace that might be a stock, and it doesn’t have a stock, then it isn’t designed to be shouldered and therefore is a pistol without regard to weight or length. In short, if no brace then you never start the worksheet.

I was looking at a pistol tonight, one designed for a suppressor. The handguard is long enough to contain most of the suppressor. So, is OAL measured from the muzzle or somewhere else?

 

[matttahoe53]

I was looking at a pistol tonight, one designed for a suppressor. The handguard is long enough to contain most of the suppressor. So, is OAL measured from the muzzle or somewhere else?

I have a feeling that if this new rule change goes through there will be a flood for suppressor shrouds to p/w to the barrel on the market.

Examples:

https://midstatefirearms.com/BMS-300Blk-Upper-105-welded-Suppressor-Shroud-Legal-16-bms30.htm

Tactical Solutions’ TSAR-300 Gets Around the NFA Red Tape

What do we want? A short-barreled rifle! When do we want it? Now! Well, you can’t have it now. You

www.tactical-life.com

 

[Starkherz199]

If any of you get snared by this arbitrarily mess, and wind up in court...and I am on your jury...I will nullify it in a millisecond.
I only ask that you do the same.

 

[Dale Gribble]

If any of you get snared by this arbitrarily mess, and wind up in court...and I am on your jury...I will nullify it in a millisecond.
I only ask that you do the same.

Done.

I have already decided that if I am on a jury in a trial where someone has been charged with unconstitutional bullsh*t, my vote will be “not guilty”.

That is why I’ll never complain about jury duty. That vote is YOURS and yours alone. They cannot force you to vote a specific way and that vote gives you more power, in that moment, than the government because you can say, “No...your laws are BS and this defendent is not guilty of anything.”

 

[Jerzsubbie]

Comment submitted.

I can’t get over an agency having the ability to make millions of people felons without going through Congress, not to mention their constant flip-flopping.

 

[dmo1028]

Can I safely assume this point system will apply to PCC’s such as CZ Scorpions, Stribogs, B&T GHM9, etc…?

I see a lot of discussion around the AR platform but not much said about the PCC’s.

 

[Get Off My Lawn]

From thier position, a scope's eye relief determines the position from where the gun is fired. If you properly use a brace strapped to your arm a scope isn't useful to fire from the hip, nor is it useful with your arm extended. That shows the builder's intent to fire from the shoulder where the scope is useful.
The same is true of peep sights.

My G00gleFu fails me. In the 90's there was a guy that was shooting prairie dogs past 1,000 yards using a pistol with a rifle scope. Because of the eye relief, most of the view was blacked out.

 

[GymB]

Can I safely assume this point system will apply to PCC’s such as CZ Scorpions, Stribogs, B&T GHM9, etc…?

I see a lot of discussion around the AR platform but not much said about the PCC’s.

Not familiar with most, but in general if it has a barrel less than 16” and a brace of some sort, then yes.

Got looking at a neighbor’s sig rattler today, the brace on it is embarrassingly ineffective as a brace. I wonder if they’ll introduce something (for more coin of course) that’s a more effective brace. He also has a little CMMG thing, the brace on it works pretty well at the shortest length, but it’s adjustable and sucks when extended. Both have elastic straps and that seems to be an issue. Funny thing is that the CMMG takes glock 45acp mags, and if anyone wanted to do crime they’d just carry the smaller/lighter Glock with the extended mags.

 

[JRV]

Can I safely assume this point system will apply to PCC’s such as CZ Scorpions, Stribogs, B&T GHM9, etc…?

I see a lot of discussion around the AR platform but not much said about the PCC’s.

That’s a major issue with the proposed point system that’s ripe for comment (ahem, for those that haven’t).

It’s a heavily AR-focused ruleset that isn’t necessarily possible to comply with (just yet) for every braced pistol in the market. Some guns may end up an ergonomic nightmare when braced if the options are unnecessarily limited, heavily impacting disabled persons’ abilities to comply with some less common guns they might own.

 

[Jayne]

I have already decided that if I am on a jury in a trial where someone has been charged with unconstitutional bullsh*t, my vote will be “not guilty”.

It's hard to stay on those juries though, gotta be careful. I was in selection for a case where the defendant was being charged with some knife crap (cops found a knife in his car and claimed he could have used it against them). When they were interviewing me they asked if I had any questions about the case, and I asked how carrying a knife in your car was even a crime? They didn't like that, so I got bounced.

 

[DrScaryGuy]

Done.

I have already decided that if I am on a jury in a trial where someone has been charged with unconstitutional bullsh*t, my vote will be “not guilty”.

That is why I’ll never complain about jury duty. That vote is YOURS and yours alone. They cannot force you to vote a specific way and that vote gives you more power, in that moment, than the government because you can say, “No...your laws are BS and this defendent is not guilty of anything.”

I was similarly dismissed from a jury pool.
The prosecutor made a big deal of saying that just because somebody is not actually inebriated doesn't mean that their BAC isn't over the legal limit, which is a crime. And also that this person was in possession of a gun (gasp) at the time, which is so terribly irresponsible. Then when they asked about people who had bad experiences with police, I honestly answered about a few situations, especially involving guns, months in court, and threats of death. The defense was terribly interested and asked what I did for a living, and I said i was working on a PhD in pharmacology. He asked if that meant i knew a little about intoxication and drug/alcohol metabolism, and I said I had a healthy understanding.
The cop sitting next to the prosecutor said "get rid of him" loud enough for everybody in the court room to look over and laugh a little. I like to hope that the other potential jurors realized the cops were trying to railroad the poor guy for a somewhat arbitrary BAC number.

 

[Starkherz199]

It's hard to stay on those juries though, gotta be careful. I was in selection for a case where the defendant was being charged with some knife crap (cops found a knife in his car and claimed he could have used it against them). When they were interviewing me they asked if I had any questions about the case, and I asked how carrying a knife in your car was even a crime? They didn't like that, so I got bounced.

I guess we have to be quiet, respectful, answer every question as little as possible, and "trick" our way onto these juries. One definite no is to mention jury nullification at all. The judge will hold you in.contempt, banish you to Mars, and eat your first born baby. Or something like that

 

[ChickenHawk]

I guess we have to be quiet, respectful, answer every question as little as possible, and "trick" our way onto these juries. One definite no is to mention jury nullification at all. The judge will hold you in.contempt, banish you to Mars, and eat your first born baby. Or something like that

But you can discuss jury nullification once you all go to deliberate right?

 

[Timfoilhat]

The only time I ever got called for jury duty I got dismissed for being too well connected. I dated the judge's daughter in HS, the detective was a neighbor down the street I grew up on, the two arresting officers were regular customers I was friendly with in the convenience store I was a manager for in college. The whole court was laughing.

 

[Radar]

The only time I ever got called for jury duty I got dismissed for being too well connected. I dated the judge's daughter in HS, the detective was a neighbor down the street I grew up on, the two arresting officers were regular customers I was friendly with in the convenience store I was a manager for in college. The whole court was laughing.

I went as called to Federal Jury duty in Raleigh. I sat there all morning, and I waited my turn to be called up for questioning with about 75 other people. They brought us lunch on the house and then finally about 2pm started to question us. This lasted until about 3:30 before the judge sent us all home for the day and ordered us to continue the next morning. When they called me up around 9:45 the next morning. They asked me who I was, if I knew anyone in law enforcement or public safety. I informed him I knew a lot of people as I was a career Firefighter and Paramedic. The judge gets red in the face and immediately excuses me without the prosecutor or defense objecting. He then asked me to approach and personally apologized for wasting my time. The case apparently was involving a a real estate transaction by a former law enforcement or public safety officer and we were specifically denied by the agreed upon by both sides pre trial arrangements from serving on the jury.

 

[DrScaryGuy]

I guess we have to be quiet, respectful, answer every question as little as possible, and "trick" our way onto these juries. One definite no is to mention jury nullification at all. The judge will hold you in.contempt, banish you to Mars, and eat your first born baby. Or something like that

But you can discuss jury nullification once you all go to deliberate right?

I expect that if you tried that, you would get hit with tampering or contempt or something, and they would bring in an alternate juror. People have had to fight their way up to higher courts just to overturn convictions for TALKING about nullification to potential jurors.

 

[Starkherz199]

But you can discuss jury nullification once you all go to deliberate right?

Never use the phrase. Depending on the circumstances the judge can make you regret it.

Not Guilty: The Power of Jury Nullification to Counteract Government Tyranny | Tenth Amendment Center

Nullify everything the government does that is illegitimate, egregious or blatantly unconstitutional.

tenthamendmentcenter.com

 

[Flashpoint]

So I just purchased an Extar EP9 after reviewing the specs in comparison with these proposed restrictions but now I'm concerned. Initially I read that it weighed 4.1 lbs, but now I'm seeing more and more there are two weights given, with the brace (4.1) and without the brace (3.x). So since it ships with the brace (although it's not installed for packaging reasons) and is intended to be used with the brace wouldn't the weight measurement include the brace? Or am I screwed?

 

[S4f]

So I just purchased an Extar EP9 after reviewing the specs in comparison with these proposed restrictions but now I'm concerned. Initially I read that it weighed 4.1 lbs, but now I'm seeing more and more there are two weights given, with the brace (4.1) and without the brace (3.x). So since it ships with the brace (although it's not installed for packaging reasons) and is intended to be used with the brace wouldn't the weight measurement include the brace? Or am I screwed?

Yankee marshall using the check list on his non ar pistol
Don't know if this helps you but it is informative.

 

[Flashpoint]

I think I'm screwed with the Extar. I just noticed that the title of this damn thing classifies the braces as accessories, and the weight measurement is with accessories removed.

So is a rifle stock an accessory? No! It's an integral part of the weapon. Then why is a brace on a pistol designed to use a brace an accessory? If it didn't have a brace it wouldn't fall into this category at all, so IMHO the brace is an integral part of the firearm this document refers to.

 

[DrScaryGuy]

Yankee marshall using the check list on his non ar pistol
Don't know if this helps you but it is informative.

i've learned to not believe much of what that guy says.

 

[S4f]

i've learned to not believe much of what that guy says.

Of all the videos Ive watched his was the most informative . For me any way

 

[wvsig]

i've learned to not believe much of what that guy says.

Of all the videos Ive watched his was the most informative . For me any way

Generally I find that guy annoying. He used to post over on THR and TFL a lot years ago. Disliked him there too but on this one I have to agree with @S4f. His is one of the only videos which breaks down an example of how a braced pistol is going to pass the points test as written. It also illustrates how adjustability and retractability basically makes any braced pistol a rifle under the points system. The entire thing is written focusing on the AR15 and AK platforms. IMHO

Everyone else is just running around screaming felony, unconstitutional, ATF sucks etc.....

I think everyone who comments needs to point out that the adjustability of braces makes them safer and easer to shoot one handed for a larger group of people due to differences in body size and body proportions. It is not only to make the pistol more shoulderable. If the points of adjustability go away or get lessoned more braces will stay under 3 points and still be allowed. I think the entire thing sucks but at the same time it it the universe we find ourselves in so it is better to understand it vs scream the sky is falling.

 

[Flashpoint]

At the risk of revealng the obvious and therefore most likely ruffling some feathers, has anyone here actually tried putting their arm through one of those braces and tried to get a sight picture with their AR "pistol"?

It's the most awkward thing. The only way I can get a sight picture is to hold the thing tilted quite a bit, and it's so front heavy I can't do it for very long and expect anything approaching even barn side accuracy.

This whole thing is a joke. As a one handed shooter I could be way more accurate and deadly with a typical handgun. It amazes me that the ATF ever fell for this in the first place.

I don't like infringements on our 2A rights anymore than anyone here, just stating the obvious.

 

[wvsig]

At the risk of revealng the obvious and therefore most likely ruffling some feathers, has anyone here actually tried putting their arm through one of those braces and tried to get a sight picture with their AR "pistol"?

It's the most awkward thing. The only way I can get a sight picture is to hold the thing tilted quite a bit, and it's so front heavy I can't do it for very long and expect anything approaching even barn side accuracy.

This whole thing is a joke. As a one handed shooter I could be way more accurate and deadly with a typical handgun. It amazes me that the ATF ever fell for this in the first place.

I don't like infringements on our 2A rights anymore than anyone here, just stating the obvious.

I think this is especially true for AR15s of certain lengths. Other platforms like the CZ Scorpion and HK MP5 can be run with their factory sights using the factory supplied sling or no sling. People do not want to admit it but 99%+ of braces that were bought were bought to be shot on a pistol people intended to be shouldered. I mean look at Youtube and other social media video platforms. 99% of the time people with braced pistols are shouldering them. In the end its all BS. There are between 3 million to 8 million braced firearms out in the marketplace and the number that have been used in crimes or "mass shootings" do not even equal .001% of the number in use. This is a political dog and pony show but lets not be intellectually dishonest and say we all shoot our braced AR15s one handed.

 

[Timfoilhat]

I have a nerve condition that weakened my hands. Back when I had an AR pistol fitted with a Tailhook I found it was a legitimate way to shoot and a very stable platform when using the brace as intended.

 

[fishgutzy]

This video is hysterical. Perfect analysis of how the ATF defied "circumventing" the NFA as being a violation of the NFA.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[GymB]

At the risk of revealng the obvious and therefore most likely ruffling some feathers, has anyone here actually tried putting their arm through one of those braces and tried to get a sight picture with their AR "pistol"?

It's the most awkward thing. The only way I can get a sight picture is to hold the thing tilted quite a bit, and it's so front heavy I can't do it for very long and expect anything approaching even barn side accuracy.

This whole thing is a joke. As a one handed shooter I could be way more accurate and deadly with a typical handgun. It amazes me that the ATF ever fell for this in the first place.

I don't like infringements on our 2A rights anymore than anyone here, just stating the obvious.

I did, just yesterday.

With the original sb15 (I think) I can fit my arm in and the shaped arms wrap around my forearm and are secured with a nylon strap. This almost locks my wrist in line with the pistol, making it very very hard to use the rds when holding it with one hand. If I grip with two hands (just like gripping any other pistol) it works fine.

The brace on the Sig Rattler is simply too narrow to fit my arm in. The strap is elastic which seems to offend ATF, but I don’t know why. Sighting is as above, very difficult with 1 hand.

The brace on the CMMG Berserk (?) is in the middle, it is a little small to fit my forearm and the sides are parallel and then turned in at the bottom, those bits dig into my arm. The length of the brace is adjustable, and it works best by far at the shortest length. Sighting is as above, very difficult with one hand.

I’m working on comments, but my guess is that regardless, any design or implementation of a brace will need to be both a good brace and a crappy shoulder stock to pass muster.

 

[HotSoup]

The only time I ever got called for jury duty I got dismissed for being too well connected. I dated the judge's daughter in HS, the detective was a neighbor down the street I grew up on, the two arresting officers were regular customers I was friendly with in the convenience store I was a manager for in college. The whole court was laughing.

Didn't work for me. I knew the arresting officer and actually worked with him. Knew the DA and a few others in the case....still had to stay.