Fess Wrote:I don't understand why so many people could misinterpret the wording in the March 2017 letter which clearly stated this about the particular brace that was accepted: "With respect to stabilizing braces, ATF has concluded that attaching the brace to a handgun as a forearm brace does not "make" a short-barreled rifle because in the configuration as submitted to and approved by the FATD, it is not intended to be and cannot comfortably be fired from the shoulder" (emphasis, mine). My reading is that any brace that can be comfortably fired from the shoulder would not qualify.

lazyengineer Wrote:You're not wrong - but with 6.5 Grendel it was tidy, as the open policy allowed folks to run very tidy 12" 6.5 Grendel, which is actually a pretty great build. The letters never actually said what people thought they said - but the ATF enforcement practices defacto said that the arm-braces were OK. With a 12" Grendel the handiness and weight are so incredibly light and small, yet it's still a potent game-killer out to 100 and even 200 + yards, and a gong-hitter much farther then that. It's one of the ultimate general purpose rifle configurations I've ever handled. ATF basically said this was A-OK if not in their letters, than in their enforcement practices; and now they are saying, it's not. So it's a bummer to see it go, and passions are going to run high on this topic.

I'm leaning hard to actually just getting a 12" into the system, just to have it. It'll never be more readily easy to do so, than now. That, and unlike machine-guns, one can be be an SBR / not be an SBR simply by adjusting configuration right then and there. And even remove it from the NFA registry via letter, at discretion. So right now, it's basically free to register, with no engraving, and you can continue to use it right now while under review; and if you change your mind later, a simple letter to ATF and it goes off the NFA and is just another lower. Physically by simply just putting a 16" upper on it, and it's now no longer a regulated SBR, regardless of if the SN is in the NFA - it's not an SBR anymore. Meaning you (or your heirs) can readily sell or transfer it, simply by not having the <16" upper on it. Until you switch it back. Kind of tempting, to be honest. With most NFA items, there's the PITA of what happens when it's time to divest or transfer it. With an SBR, it's easy - just take off the upper and sell that separately from the lower.

Though in some forums, this is a spicy topic of passion and wildly varying opinions. All I will say, is beware anyone trying to goad you into violating what is being enforced as federal law. In AR15.com, there is a collective freakout to goad and belittle people to refuse to take the Amnesty, that frankly, I don't really agree with.

LRRPF52 Wrote:I’m not even remotely tempted to register (this is against the law, remember) my firearms with an unconstitutional agency filled with actual criminals from the start.

It is our duty as unruly Americans to fight this, not comply or support it with the servile behavior of a 3rd-world peasant.

montana Wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbHcNkACrcc

LRRPF52 Wrote:Congressman,

I’m contacting you about the recent ATF “ruling", where they seek to make millions of felons out of Americans who have been exercising their rights without issue for 11 years. As you read through the 1934 NFA hearings, you learn some startling facts that are not well-known:

1. Then Attorney General Cummings' intent was to ban pistols first. This was addressed by then NRA President and Olympic Gold Medalist Karl Frederick, who persuaded Congress to remove that provision. The pistol ban was dropped from the act.

2. The AG avoided mentioning rifles. Rifles were brought up by Congressman Harold Knutson of MN. The topic was the proposal to limit shotgun barrel length at 16”. Knutson expressed concern that rifles would be included in the NFA, to which the AG responded that the legislation only addressed pistols, shotguns, and machine-guns. He stated they didn’t even care about longer machine-guns like the BAR or Browning, just Thompson SMGs, because the BAR and Browning were too heavy, bulky, and cumbersome for gangsters to use. With the pistol ban removed, it didn’t make any sense to include SBRs or SBSs, but they still remained due to the Knutson blunder, which was based on intent to protect rifles.

3. A most egregious discussion during the proceedings was the admission by the AG’s office that banning firearms was unconstitutional, so they proposed a loophole by levying a prohibitive $200 stamp. They openly discussed how to use Congress’s taxation power as a weapon to violate the Bill of Rights. pg 91 of the NFA, 73rd Congress, 1934

4. When challenged by Congressmen about the practicality of passing laws against gangsters, Assistant AG Keenan made a startling admission. The NFA wasn’t really for them, but to prevent young boys from obtaining firearms. Mr. Keenan: “He was once a youngster, and he bought or got a gun, and he learned how to use the gun at the time when he was not a hardened criminal.” pg 92, 73rd Congress NFA Hearings

5. Mr. Knutson, still concerned about rifles, suggested that rifles should be protected from the NFA, by increased the minimum barrel length from 16” to 18” for both rifles and shotguns. ATF has since amended this arbitrary barrel length separately for shotguns and rifles, with shotguns left at 18”, and rifles at 16”.

6. Mr. Keenan openly stated in regard to setting the amount for stamp taxes, “The amount is not important except from this standpoint; it would be desirable to have the sale of guns in the hands of as few people as possible as the matter of efficiency to keep track of these weapons and see whether the are sold to the wrong people.”

You get a sense for a set of ideas that were so far out of control, seeing the common man as a mere criminal who needs to be regulated, with constant threat of police powers and imprisonment for exercising basic rights.

Pistols with stabilizing braces have been in widespread use since 2012. The Congressional Research Service published a report in 2021 finding that 10-40 million braces had been manufactured and circulated.

This brings us to our current state of affairs. Biden’s ATF Director Steven Dettelbach just announced a “ruling” on pistol braces which would make all of the millions of law-abiding owners felons in 120 days.

As for me and my family, we will NOT COMPLY regardless of the outcome. We have benefitted greatly from stabilizing braces, especially my wife and children. Without said devices, they would not be able to comfortably or effectively bear the arms these devices are attached to. Shorter overall length AR-15 pistols have proven to be excellent firearms useful for many legal purposes. We will not be intimidated and threatened by criminals in suits under color of law.

I’m eagerly awaiting your action on this matter in reeling in and restricting the ATF’s unconstitutional and brazen criminal activity.