Who will ask to see the Form 1 or Form 4?

[HoustonHipster6.5]

To purchase a silencer, there really is no other choice than paying BATFE and getting a Form 4. However, many AR pistol owners are now considering registering as SBRs with a Form 1.

My question is: Who is going to ask me to show the Form 4 or Form 1?

If I show up at a public range with my AR Pistol is the owner going to scrutinize my stabilizing brace and call the fuzz on me?
Will there be random ATF agents stationed at ranges checking paperwork, like a game warden at the docks?
How likely am I to get away with putting a regular stock on my 12-inch Grendel and going on with my life without ever needing a Form 1?

Asking for a hypothetical friend.

Thanks.

[CJW]

I don’t go anywhere without proper DOCS……….

They get checked every time I Fly…

[LRRPF52]

Unless they’re from the appropriate agency, they don’t have any legal authority to demand inspection of NFA paperwork, since the method Congress and the Attorney General unconstitutionally “loop-holed” around the Bill of Rights in 1934 was by creating a special taxation for the NFA-mentioned firearms and non-firearms. Hence the tax stamp. It’s a special tax you pay to gain access to your rights, and they described it as such during the NFA proceedings in Congress in 1934.

Since many LEOs aren’t even familiar with their own local codes, ordinances, and State laws, your expectation that LEOs will be competent on NFA laws might be unfounded.

My best advice is to be polite with LEOs and just treat them kindly, smile, and don’t get confrontational. Know the law, codes, covenants, and regulations, and be good at deescalating.

I personally don’t care because I live in a State where when you show up to a range, lots of people are shooting suppressed, AR pistols, suppressed pistols, etc.

We also have the Firearms Freedom Act signed by the State legislature and Governor, so they’re technically not even allowed to mess around there.

Feds don’t care though. They are a law unto themselves.

The culture here has changed dramatically because of the proliferation of suppressors and the fact that we have the largest suppressor manufacturer in the US (SilencerCo).

Most LEOs here have grown-up with suppressors around when the topic of firearms comes up. They just don’t care.

I asked our local sheriff about pistol braces and AR-15 pistols, would he enforce laws restricting them, his opinion on them, and his comment was, “I bought my wife one! It’s fun and we like shooting it. She likes shooting it!”

Of course, if it was California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Illinois, etc., they would treat you like a criminal for even thinking about owning such things.

It’s just another reason why this needs to be put to rest by SCOTUS.

[LRRPF52]

Different options:

Some people carry laminated copies of their stamps for each serialed device.

Some people say, “If you’re one of the treasury department agents mentioned specifically on the back of my Form 1s and Form 4s, then here’s a copy of my stamps.”

“This approved application is the registrant’s proof of registration and it shall be made available to any ATF officer upon request.”

ATF agents don’t generally like showing up and identifying themselves at public ranges, because it may compromise what they’re actually trying to do there.

People who have produced copies have often said the agents didn’t have any record of their stamps, and asked to make copies for the local office’s records.

The whole thing is really a scam.

If you live in a State that doesn’t allow certain NFA items, then LEOs not with Treasury can ask to see proof of registered NFA items if they believe you’re in violation of State law.

[Happy2Shoot]

To purchase a silencer, there really is no other choice than paying BATFE and getting a Form 4. However, many AR pistol owners are now considering registering as SBRs with a Form 1.

My question is: Who is going to ask me to show the Form 4 or Form 1?

If I show up at a public range with my AR Pistol is the owner going to scrutinize my stabilizing brace and call the fuzz on me?
Will there be random ATF agents stationed at ranges checking paperwork, like a game warden at the docks?
How likely am I to get away with putting a regular stock on my 12-inch Grendel and going on with my life without ever needing a Form 1?

Asking for a hypothetical friend.

Thanks.

What state do you live in? NJ? Heck yeah. VA? Not likely. Also, don't risk getting in unbelievably big trouble over this stuff. Just get a brace or pay the $200.

[HKGuns]

To purchase a silencer, there really is no other choice than paying BATFE and getting a Form 4. However, many AR pistol owners are now considering registering as SBRs with a Form 1.

My question is: Who is going to ask me to show the Form 4 or Form 1?

If I show up at a public range with my AR Pistol is the owner going to scrutinize my stabilizing brace and call the fuzz on me?
Will there be random ATF agents stationed at ranges checking paperwork, like a game warden at the docks?
How likely am I to get away with putting a regular stock on my 12-inch Grendel and going on with my life without ever needing a Form 1?

Asking for a hypothetical friend.

Thanks.

What do you think those 87K IRS agents will be doing? They're going to be stationed at every shooting range to collect stamps and taxes.

[Sinclair]

What do you think those 87K IRS agents will be doing? They're going to be stationed at every shooting range to collect stamps and taxes.

Don't laugh, years ago I used to frequently attend events with a "buckskiner" theme. I was surprised at how many times there were IRS agents checking and collecting taxes from the venders. That was in the "old days" when the IRS was "short handed", what will it be like with an addition 87,000 agents, checking neighborhood yard sales? Big Brother is everywhere!

[LRRPF52]

What do you think those 87K IRS agents will be doing? They're going to be stationed at every shooting range to collect stamps and taxes.

There’s not an additional 87k IRS agents, but a recruiting drive to hire that many over the next 10 years to replace a mass retirement of older agents who are done and no longer working. That was part of the “Inflation Reduction Act" passed by last year’s Congress. Now the new House just voted to cut the funding for the 87k new IRS collectors, but it would need to pass the Senate and WH.

There isn’t big money in stamp taxes either obviously. They’re more interested in targeting businesses.

We need to handle this at the State level and have State AGs, Sheriffs, City PDs, County Attorneys, etc. all notify the Federal agencies that any ATF, IRS, or Federal agents engaged in such criminal activity will be arrested for violation of the bill of rights while acting under the color of law under Section 18 of the USC. it specifically forbids anyone in uniform from violating people’s rights under false pretenses of law enforcement, so that fundamentally crushes the ATF’s entire baseline for existence.

We’re seeing something similar to this happening in Illinois right now, but only at the Sheriff level.

The real problem is the FFL network, where the ATF has suborned businesses to act in a law enforcement capacity by having people fill out 4473s and conduct NICS checks on them with the FBI.

If they shut down FFLs in a State, the citizens don’t have any real recourse.

[Happy2Shoot]

@HoustonHipster6.5

Feel free to get this tattoo. I hear there is a great tattoo parlor at 5825 North Sam Houston Pkwy W, Houston, TX 77086. Never been there myself, have you?

[Hansel&Grendel]

ATF is suggesting that it loses about $250 million per year in tax stamp revenue primarily over pistol-braced ARs for which people are not paying the $200 tax stamp under NFA. Yet, DOJ and ATF, pursuant to ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F (circulating on the Internet today) are prepared to waive the $200 tax stamp if one eforms registers a pistol-braced AR within 120 days presumably from this Monday. So, the motivation does not appear to be revenue based, butt rather registration based (which we all knew).

I, too, am not concerned with 87,000 IRS agents. There are plans to increase the Criminal Investigation Division of IRS to about 4,000 special agents who are armed; however, I very much doubt that they will be snooping around gun ranges, etc., to help enforce 2021R-08F out of fear of their presence not being taken to very kindly.

What is of some concern is that a commercial property realtor friend in Southwest Virginia received a flyer not long ago wherein ATF was soliciting real property managers with a commercial real estate background to manage federally owned or processed properties. Being a retired LE, I thought that this was to manage asset forfeitures by ATF to include real property seizures. Nope. The flyer was to manage ATF occupied office space within the Washington, D.C. Field Office (and I'm sure elsewhere throughout the country). Typically, such properties are managed and overseen by GSA. So, that tells me that the ATF solicitation of office space property managers is future planning where ATF's presence is to be vastly expanded.

Incidentally, I worked with old-school ATF Agents over the years. Their emphasis in the vast majority of cases was "G and G" (Gangs and Guns); not what we have going today.

[HoustonHipster6.5]

What state do you live in? NJ? Heck yeah. VA? Not likely. Also, don't risk getting in unbelievably big trouble over this stuff. Just get a brace or pay the $200.

Only now the brace is no good, either.

[HoustonHipster6.5]

ATF is suggesting that it loses about $250 million per year in tax stamp revenue primarily over pistol-braced ARs for which people are not paying the $200 tax stamp under NFA. Yet, DOJ and ATF, pursuant to ATF Final Rule 2021R-08F (circulating on the Internet today) are prepared to waive the $200 tax stamp if one eforms registers a pistol-braced AR within 120 days presumably from this Monday. So, the motivation does not appear to be revenue based, butt rather registration based (which we all knew).

If they are offering a "no-cost" eform, does it not make sense for me to register all of my lowers as SBRs in case I happen to attach a short upper? That's the beauty of the AR, mutiple calibers, multiple configurations, all on a common lower. Bases covered. What do you think?

[LRRPF52]

If they are offering a "no-cost" eform, does it not make sense for me to register all of my lowers as SBRs in case I happen to attach a short upper? That's the beauty of the AR, mutiple calibers, multiple configurations, all on a common lower. Bases covered. What do you think?

Registration precedes confiscation.

Congress has expressly forbidden any Federal agency from keeping a gun registry.

This is where you take all the years of sitting in a classroom, where they trained us to obey, and throw it out the window if you didn’t do so as a child.

Americans are an unruly people at heart who don’t recognize most man-made ideas of authority, and crafted a system that places very tight limits on the few enumerated powers listed in the Constitution.

This isn’t a Nation meant for serfs who just bow to their rulers, but maintain self-rule and the power to remain free by exercising their rights.

[lazyengineer]

If they are offering a "no-cost" eform, does it not make sense for me to register all of my lowers as SBRs in case I happen to attach a short upper? That's the beauty of the AR, mutiple calibers, multiple configurations, all on a common lower. Bases covered. What do you think?

Lots of passion on that one. There are two main basis for those who advise against:
1) It's a trap. Personally, I don't think it is, as the ATF has done this before without issue. I think motivation is they simply weren't enforcing NFA as written, and they are doing this to get back to doing so.
2) Solidarity. Sort of a Scabs at the Strike take, on doing anything the ATF wants. Which I kind of get, but not everybody is at a place in life where this is the hill they will die upon, nor in a setting so understanding. To OP's question, if you are going to public ranges - then yes, it's not unusual at all for some busybody to feel important and harrass or a range officer to over-fixate on percieved range liablities, and ask to see your license. If you refuse, you don't get to shoot.

If you do register, then sure, no reason not to just register as much as you can, since it can go into and out of NFA classification at your discretion. So even if it's registered as an SBR, if you put a 16" upper on it, it no longer is, and you can cross state lines, sell it, etc, just like a regular AR (unlike machine guns). You can even ask it to be officically stricken from NFA list by a letter, at any time as well.

HOWEVER, research and have care before piling your AR rifles in on this. The Amnesty is for Arm Braces applied to "handgun" pistols with BBL<16". And only that. If your lower started life as a RIFLE, rather than as a Pistol or Other, then when ATF runs your application serial number - you will now have a signed legal document basically saying you converted a Rifle into an SBR, which is not protected by this amnesty. They might grant it, they might just deny and forget about, or they might chose to give you grief; I really don't know. My guess is they'lll just deny it with instruction to turn that one back into a >16" rifle, but I don't know - not worth it to save $200 for a pile-on SBR stamp.

[HoustonHipster6.5]

Lots of passion on that one. There are two main basis for those who advise against:
1) It's a trap. Personally, I don't think it is, as the ATF has done this before without issue. I think motivation is they simply weren't enforcing NFA as written, and they are doing this to get back to doing so.
2) Solidarity. Sort of a Scabs at the Strike take, on doing anything the ATF wants. Which I kind of get, but not everybody is at a place in life where this is the hill they will die upon, nor in a setting so understanding. To OP's question, if you are going to public ranges - then yes, it's not unusual at all for some busybody to feel important and harrass or a range officer to over-fixate on percieved range liablities, and ask to see your license. If you refuse, you don't get to shoot.

If you do register, then sure, no reason not to just register as much as you can, since it can go into and out of NFA classification at your discretion. So even if it's registered as an SBR, if you put a 16" upper on it, it no longer is, and you can cross state lines, sell it, etc, just like a regular AR (unlike machine guns). You can even ask it to be officically stricken from NFA list by a letter, at any time as well.

HOWEVER, research and have care before piling your AR rifles in on this. The Amnesty is for Arm Braces applied to "handgun" pistols with BBL<16". And only that. If your lower started life as a RIFLE, rather than as a Pistol or Other, then when ATF runs your application serial number - you will now have a signed legal document basically saying you converted a Rifle into an SBR, which is not protected by this amnesty. They might grant it, they might just deny and forget about it, or they might choose to give you grief; I really don't know. My guess is they'll just deny it with instruction to turn that one back into a >16" rifle, but I don't know - not worth it to save $200 for a pile-on SBR stamp.

Great response that characterizes the range of feelings over the issue. I fall into the category of not wanting to go to jail or financial ruin just for shooting my shorty. The goal is the least amount of grief from the government for the least amount of money.

With respect to the free stamp for pistol-braced lowers, I don't recall ever declaring what I was going to build with my stripped lower. If that's the case, does the BATFE still consider it a work in progress? Do I have the opportunity to write up a Form 1 declaring it an SBR? Same question for my currently unfinished stripped lowers.

If anyone has info regarding a good legal analyst on this issue, I'm all ears.


SIDEBAR: I have a new Acronym for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Compliance Enforcement Services. B A T FECES. You're welcome!

[HoustonHipster6.5]

-Happy2Shoot

Ha Ha! No tattoos for me, but thanks!

[Ryno785]

Lots of passion on that one. There are two main basis for those who advise against:
1) It's a trap. Personally, I don't think it is, as the ATF has done this before without issue. I think motivation is they simply weren't enforcing NFA as written, and they are doing this to get back to doing so.
2) Solidarity. Sort of a Scabs at the Strike take, on doing anything the ATF wants. Which I kind of get, but not everybody is at a place in life where this is the hill they will die upon, nor in a setting so understanding. To OP's question, if you are going to public ranges - then yes, it's not unusual at all for some busybody to feel important and harrass or a range officer to over-fixate on percieved range liablities, and ask to see your license. If you refuse, you don't get to shoot.

If you do register, then sure, no reason not to just register as much as you can, since it can go into and out of NFA classification at your discretion. So even if it's registered as an SBR, if you put a 16" upper on it, it no longer is, and you can cross state lines, sell it, etc, just like a regular AR (unlike machine guns). You can even ask it to be officically stricken from NFA list by a letter, at any time as well.

HOWEVER, research and have care before piling your AR rifles in on this. The Amnesty is for Arm Braces applied to "handgun" pistols with BBL<16". And only that. If your lower started life as a RIFLE, rather than as a Pistol or Other, then when ATF runs your application serial number - you will now have a signed legal document basically saying you converted a Rifle into an SBR, which is not protected by this amnesty. They might grant it, they might just deny and forget about, or they might chose to give you grief; I really don't know. My guess is they'lll just deny it with instruction to turn that one back into a >16" rifle, but I don't know - not worth it to save $200 for a pile-on SBR stamp.

Do you really trust that the ATF will remove your gun from their database at your request? The Feds haven't proven to be overly trustworthy and this seems like another power grab. It certainly has nothing to do with preventing violent crime or helping law abiding citizens in any way.

[lazyengineer]

Do you really trust that the ATF will remove your gun from their database at your request? The Feds haven't proven to be overly trustworthy and this seems like another power grab. It certainly has nothing to do with preventing violent crime or helping law abiding citizens in any way.

To the level of it not coming up as an active NFA reciever in the NFA database, sure. To the level of the ATF now knowing I have that particular lower - certainly not. Considering they have my fingerprints on file from my 20's getting ODCMP rifles, CHL, and more - I'm pretty sure my own days of slipping below the radar are far gone.

I also remember reading Unintended Consequences long ago. In that book, when a wide 1968 amnesty was offered, our protagonist hit the machine shop and mass produced everything he could, to get in. I remember the 1986 ban too. Those who weren't already in, got hosed.

I don't know where this is going. Quite possibly it will be tossed - in which case people will be running real stocks they got to do for easy and free.

[grayfox]

Will be interesting to be sure, especially in these days of Bruen and WV vs. EPA. The gist of the latter is that an administrative bureau cannot make a new Reg not specifically authorized by Congress if it is a major action -- Congress must give explicit authority. Definition of "major action" is if it costs over $100 million. And the ATF has acknowledged this will cost over that, probably IIRC over $250 M. So unconstitutional, plus Bruen Heller etc say Biden (make no mistake it is on his watch) cannot forbid or criminalize a weapon in common use... which all of these are.
But none of this deters the leftists: notice that Illinois just passed a bunch of unconstitutional (US constitution) state laws as reaction to SCOTUS' Bruen... they will keep at it until someone, in Schwartzkopf-lingo, "breaks their nose" - and I'm talking about the leftists behind all of this, not just the bureaucrats... altho they need it too.
Finally, it fails because of the legal doctrine you cannot make something illegal that was purchased when it was legal -- Leniety or some such term. This is the same issue that Tumka ran into last week when he floated the idea of banning gas stoves "for health reasons" -- which CPSC also does not have authority to rule on anyway.

[Jake TN]

It will be interesting for sure. This case is not as simple as the EPA case or trump bum stock ban. Technically speaking the ATF did not have the authority to say whether braces would be legal or not. It was based upon their interpretation of the law. Instead of seeking clarification for the legislature, they approved the first brace, however, none of the preceding braces. Since they have taken so long to take action they are going to find themselves in a pickle. A crafty attorney would argue that they did not have the authority to approve the first brace and therefore everything is technically not legal (would open up lawsuits). On the flip side the Supreme Court could use that so many are in population that it is now common. This is a difficult case and will be interesting to see how it plays out. I am glad the Supreme Court is finally putting the different branches of government in their correct places. Personally I do not agree that SBRs or suppressor's should be NFA items, but that was passed by our legislative branch. Not sure much much weight Ex Post Facto . They are not charging purchase after the fact, but possession of an item.

This is likely more of a political decision to appeal to some of the more woke base and try to get the current classified material out of the news cycle. Personally, I think it will be overturned. Good time to go the courts to set the precedence for all other cases.