Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 34
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    N. KY
    Posts
    3,085
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    I've been anticipating this for quite a while and here it is, I suppose. Shouldn't the ATF be out looking for bad guy importers and sellers of firearms to the criminal element. Seems like they should be keeping law abiding citizens safe from thugs, criminals, organized crime, etc...

    FT
    NRA Life Member
    Basket full of Deplorables Life Member


  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    534
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadwing View Post
    I wouldn't put it past them. That said, the ATF letter stated that they would implement a separate process by which possessors of brace equipped firearms can register them to be compliant with the NFA. And if compliance with the NFA is what they're after, i would think they'd have to register it as a weapon regulated by the NFA. Since pistols (even if equipped with a brace) with rifled bores don't meet the definition of an AOW, their only other choice would be to register them as SBRs. Since the braces i own were purchased as placeholders for eventual stocks and registration as SBRs, and the ATF already has my name from previous NFA purchases, i'll gladly accept their generous offer of free stamps for what would have cost me a couple grand to register.
    i think this is part of the plan. and when thousands literally do the same thing to save $200, they'll claim it was a massive success with a ton of compliance and will work it out for the next scheme. Im not sure i disagree with the people taking advantage of a free tax stamp by doing this, but its a lose/lose situation for the firearms and 2a community as a whole.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,862
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I don't own any braced firearms but I still think it's a very bad idea to go along with this. It's not about $200. If I had a braced firearm the main reason would be to travel across state lines.

    If they were to eliminate the state line rule about notification then that would change the game regarding braces. Now I legally can't go between two states that both allow SBRs without notifying the master at the ATF and getting permission first.

    If they eliminated that rule there would I believe there would be hundreds of thousands of more registered SBRs out there.

    Even that sucks because it plays into the whole registry of all guns thing. Ideally it would be best to show some common sense and remove barrel length restrictions from the NFA all together.

    Hell, I was just watching some videos about the FKBrno and it defeats body armor out past 100 yards from a standard size pistol. Basically my point is technology has rendered the NFA to be even more stupid now than it's ever been.

    They are having this huge fight literally over a piece of rubber that has zero impact on the functions of the firearm.

    As it stands now I am all about fighting this at every turn.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,862
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    You know, if this ends up going through people should design buffer tubes with different lengths for a different length of pull and then sell a t shirt separately that has a heavy duty rubber "U" right in the pocket of your shoulder where you could shoulder a bare extension tube without it hurting your shoulder.

    Then we can watch them try to ban t shirts and rubber "U" shaped items.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,080
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    You know, if this ends up going through people should design buffer tubes with different lengths for a different length of pull and then sell a t shirt separately that has a heavy duty rubber "U" right in the pocket of your shoulder where you could shoulder a bare extension tube without it hurting your shoulder.

    Then we can watch them try to ban t shirts and rubber "U" shaped items.
    I've had similar ides.

    The term “rifle” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder
    Trying to figure out how to make a stock designed to rest against your sternum. Then it wouldn't be a rifle.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,862
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by BoilerUp View Post
    I've had similar ideas.
    Make a heavy duty softish rubber "plate" that contours to your shoulder that you can glue or iron on to a shirt.

    The raised portion can be the letter J, X, U, upside down A, V, etc and it only needs to be about half an inch or less high to prevent it from slipping around.

    The main point is that no matter how much they try people will find a new way around it.

    Hell, we could sell rubber alphabet letters on ebay and make a good profit if it comes down to it.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,104
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I think I found a "handy" solution guys:

    Name:  Image.jpeg
Views: 273
Size:  96.4 KB

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    1,752
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tact View Post
    ...and there lies the problem.
    I'm not saying what the ATF is doing isn't 100% bullshit. Because it is, and the NFA in its entirety should be made null and void. I'm only saying why not use their stupid regulation to my advantage. I was already planning on SBR'ing a bunch of guns, and only haven't because getting finger printed around here has been a pain in the ass, especially without h covid restrictions. Some of those just happen to have braces. The details of what the ATF's registration process looks like (i.e. will they register braced weapons as SBRs, or something else) will determine whether or not it makes sense for me to actually use the process, or just submit the Form 1s.
    "It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin

    NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    1,752
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by UWone77 View Post
    I doubt this is a free stamp for an SBR. My guess is they will eventually allow free stamps for AR pistols and claim AR/AK or any other firearm that uses a brace as a separate NFA Pistol classification.
    Wouldn't creating a new class of NFA weapon require them to amend the National Firearms Act? That would actually require legislation, wouldn't it? I mean, i'm sure the ATF would love to create all sorts of new categories of weapons that require registration, but as it is currently, the only category of NFA weapons i can see anything with a brace falling into is SBR (or SBS). I'm no an expert by any means, but that's my read.
    "It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin

    NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    1,752
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by n4p226r View Post
    i think this is part of the plan. and when thousands literally do the same thing to save $200, they'll claim it was a massive success with a ton of compliance and will work it out for the next scheme. Im not sure i disagree with the people taking advantage of a free tax stamp by doing this, but its a lose/lose situation for the firearms and 2a community as a whole.
    Like i said, i have weapons that will be SBR'd at some point anyway. Some have braces, some don't. My action, or inaction, will be determined by what whatever process BATFE comes up with for registering braced weapons. If it legit turns out to be expedited SBR registration without paying a $200 tax, i have no reason not to, since i was already planning on filing Form 1s anyway. But if i have to register it as a braced weapon only and can't use an actual stock, they can pound sand and i'll file the Form 1 when i get around to it.
    "It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin

    NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    3
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    At the risk of being redundant, I encourage everyone to offer a respectful and concise comment on the government website regarding the recent ATF letter. It might not do any good, but it certainly won't hurt...

    https://beta.regulations.gov/documen...2020-0001-0001

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,862
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by griff411 View Post
    At the risk of being redundant, I encourage everyone to offer a respectful and concise comment on the government website regarding the recent ATF letter. It might not do any good, but it certainly won't hurt...

    https://beta.regulations.gov/documen...2020-0001-0001
    I already did mine.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,862
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Apparently the ATF withdrew their proposal. That apparently means it's dead (for now).


  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,862
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,104
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Won't hurt to go comment on the proposal anyway ... let your voice be heard. They won't back down so easily again if captain Octogenarian actually gets in office in January.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •