TexasCHLforum.com

Grayling813 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 20, 2023 8:38 am Hope everyone took the time to watch this.

I sure did, and I think the phrase "fatal flaw" on the title slide is misleading and should be "hidden entrapment."

The whole ATF 88-day automatic denial thing was news to me, as was the fact that the ATF stopped using the FBI background check system recently over some sort of interagency squabble. I have to agree that it looks like a recipe to entrap millions of law-abiding citizens into a form of illegal, federal firearm registration. After all, Joe Biden learned all he knows about firearms from Alec Baldwin, and this administration is trying to do everything it can to bypass legislation and the courts in its effort to undermine the 2nd Amendment. Throwing this in the face of up to 40 million law-abiding firearm owners would sure be a big step in accomplishing that mission.

If the median time to get an NFA stamp currently sits at around 8 months, what will happen to that investigation/approval system if just 10% of pistol brace owners decide to file? I know the 88-day thing only starts the timer once a background check is initiated (the same 88 days as for an NICS check, I believe), which check should take about one minute of computer processing time. But given a massive influx of new forms being submitted, it seems reasonable that the queue would grow much longer than the current 8 months. And I gather you'd never be notified proactively as to what stage of the lengthy process you're in. Meaning you're technically a felon in possession of an illegal firearm for maybe a year before even finding out the result of your application.

Has the NRA issued any actual, recommended actions we should take about this? The video, natch (and I assume the GOA), just says write and call everyone you can think of. I've written Whoopi Goldberg a letter but I don't think that will do much good.

Joking aside, with that video in mind I plan to reread all (well, most) 293 pages of "ATF factoring criteria for firearms with attached stabilizing braces" and highlight the gotcha! portions that strike me as solid rationale to delay this thing. Who has the ability to remove it from the federal register? Only the ATF or higher-ups in the Department of Justice?

My friend gave a half-hearted initial effort at twisting his brace on the buffer tube. He bought his from an FFL as a new, complete firearm, and evidently the manufacturer used Locktite to secure the brace. On the plus side, the brace is perfectly aligned vertically with the sight alignment and ain't gonna move accidentally. On the minus side, it's going to be a real bear to get it off without at least marring the firearm. The otherwise super-handy AR15 multi-tool has got nuthin' to help with that process. Looks like it's going to take a padded vice and brute force.

The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 6:35 pm According to the ATF, I can keep that brace if I put it on a lower that’s mated to a 16" or longer barreled upper. But that’s just dumb. Whatever the ATF thinks, a pistol brace does not make as good of a buttstock as as an actual buttstock makes. If I had to, I could just lose the brace overboard in the nearest lake, and put a regular buttstock on that spare lower…but largely as a matter of principle, I don’t want the option to keep it taken away from me by an unconstitutional ATF fiat.

I'm far from an informed commenter, but in that 293-page "final" edict, I read it as you can (discounting the route to register it as a new NFA SBR, turning the firearm in to your local ATF office, or destroying the entire firearm) either attach the brace to a 16" or longer barreled upper OR "permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the 'stabilizing brace' such that it cannot be reattached..." (Page 272, section V. item B.3.) They go on in the same paragraph to tell us of their altruistic magnanimity: "However, the Department in its enforcement discretion will allow persons to reconfigure the firearm to a pistol by [INSERT DATE 120 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] and will not require the registration of these firearms as a 'weapon made from a rifle'."

So you can keep the upper, but I gather at most all it can have is the buffer tube hanging off it. My bet is that even a nicely padded insert over the tube can be construed as turning it into something that can potentially be "shoulder mounted." But the existing brace itself has to be destroyed...well, at least rendered incapable of mounting onto a firearm, which would make it destroyed, anyway.

Note that that applies only to us lowly average citizens. The rules are a bit different for FFLs and Class 1 importers and Class 2 manufacturers.

I am not a lawyer, legislator, or peace officer, and represent myself only as an authority on napping in a recliner.