- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ATF brace rule has been published
Posted on 6/5/23 at 6:54 pm to upgrayedd
Posted on 6/5/23 at 6:54 pm to upgrayedd
I know we’re talking about it here and we understand it, but at every turn I’m reminded how impossibly convoluted and complicated this all is. Operative word being “impossibly.”
To my simple mind, if a rule can’t be clearer, it is inherently unnecessary.
To my simple mind, if a rule can’t be clearer, it is inherently unnecessary.
Posted on 6/5/23 at 6:55 pm to turkish
quote:
I know we’re talking about it here and we understand it, but at every turn I’m reminded how impossibly convoluted and complicated this all is. Operative word being “impossibly.”
To my simple mind, if a rule can’t be clearer, it is inherently unnecessary.
These people are generally incompetent and inept, however, they definitely use that to their advantage.
Posted on 6/6/23 at 7:49 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I think the ATF is being purposely ambiguous on this so they can always have an ace in the hole if they want to play it.
They are pieces of excrement. Worthless vile commie scum.
At least right now, in Texas or Louisiana, if you are a member of Firearms Policy Coalition, or a member of Gun Owners of America, the courts have active injunctions against the ATF and DOJ enforcing their “rules” against members of those organizations.
Posted on 6/6/23 at 11:39 am to Squirrelmeister
So, here's where I am standing, at this point in time;
was not a member of FPC or GOA at the moment they filed for injunction. I did not join afterwards, because I think the ruling was pretty clear that you had to be a member on day 1 of the filing. I know FPC was doing some backdating, but that's something that can be revealed way too easily with a simple financial review. I wouldn't want to try to use THAT as a defense, and then be determined to be committing fraud, perjury etc by claiming to be a member at the relevant time.
Months ago, before anything was clarified about this, I picked up some smooth buffer tubes @ $10 apiece. At the time, it seemed like that would be required to be compliant, but since then it seems like any buffer tube is ok, as long as nothing is attached.
So I have pulled the braces off, boxed them up and gave them to my brother. Different house, and he only has a single AR carbine, no pistols. They're simply "extra stocks" for him, and out of my possession.
I never fully trusted this would go well for pistols, so my uppers are Bear Creek. Absolute worst case scenario, it cost under $200 per upper, and I can get different barrels if that is the only resolution.
These are side-charging, I wanted to try that out anyway.
I suppose another option if push came to shove, get a long flash-hider and have it pinned/welded, thus bringing the overall length to 16"+. Would have to find someone who can do that for a decent price, to make that worthwhile.
was not a member of FPC or GOA at the moment they filed for injunction. I did not join afterwards, because I think the ruling was pretty clear that you had to be a member on day 1 of the filing. I know FPC was doing some backdating, but that's something that can be revealed way too easily with a simple financial review. I wouldn't want to try to use THAT as a defense, and then be determined to be committing fraud, perjury etc by claiming to be a member at the relevant time.
Months ago, before anything was clarified about this, I picked up some smooth buffer tubes @ $10 apiece. At the time, it seemed like that would be required to be compliant, but since then it seems like any buffer tube is ok, as long as nothing is attached.
So I have pulled the braces off, boxed them up and gave them to my brother. Different house, and he only has a single AR carbine, no pistols. They're simply "extra stocks" for him, and out of my possession.
I never fully trusted this would go well for pistols, so my uppers are Bear Creek. Absolute worst case scenario, it cost under $200 per upper, and I can get different barrels if that is the only resolution.
These are side-charging, I wanted to try that out anyway.
I suppose another option if push came to shove, get a long flash-hider and have it pinned/welded, thus bringing the overall length to 16"+. Would have to find someone who can do that for a decent price, to make that worthwhile.
Posted on 6/7/23 at 6:34 am to turkish
quote:
To my simple mind, if a rule can’t be clearer, it is inherently unnecessary.
thats their game, make vaguely worded rules that can be construed to mean whatever they want it to mean.
Posted on 6/7/23 at 8:59 am to Pezzo
If I remember high school civics class taught me congress makes the laws. School House rock taught that too. Thus the ATF doesn't make legitimate laws, only suggestions to congress.
This is all about posturing and control.
This is all about posturing and control.
Posted on 6/7/23 at 10:00 pm to HeadSlash
It would be hilarious if the brace takes down all the NFA's 
Posted on 6/8/23 at 3:19 pm to upgrayedd
And then all the gun grabbers could scream about actual assault rifles (even though they're too expensive for 99% of us).
Posted on 6/8/23 at 4:14 pm to HeadSlash
quote:Right, but short barreled rifles are covered by an act of Congress.
If I remember high school civics class taught me congress makes the laws. School House rock taught that too. Thus the ATF doesn't make legitimate laws
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:02 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
Right, but short barreled rifles are covered by an act of Congress
Act of Congress cannot supersede the Constitution.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 5:35 pm to udtiger
quote:
Act of Congress cannot supersede the Constitution.
It should not but unfortunately, already has.
Posted on 6/9/23 at 12:27 am to Scoob
quote:Ok, putting aside the "never give up" comments for a moment
I suppose another option if push came to shove, get a long flash-hider and have it pinned/welded, thus bringing the overall length to 16"+. Would have to find someone who can do that for a decent price, to make that worthwhile.
would something like this
LINK
be enough to pull you back to legal safety, for the time being? That's a 6" flash hider, I'm guessing pinned and welded to a 10+ inch barrel, you're now no longer in possession of a SBR. Because the barrel is no longer short... right?
How hard, once it's pinned and welded, is it to reverse, if/when this rule gets whacked?
Posted on 6/9/23 at 12:39 am to upgrayedd
quote:That's a legit thought I've had.
It would be hilarious if the brace takes down all the NFA's
I could see the NFA act get caught up in the backwash from this. Courts might rule in favor of keeping full-auto as a restriction, but the SBR angle might get wiped out.
It's truly weird that you could have a handgun (way more concealable) in any caliber, but you get restrictions on barrel length for rifles. Seems arbitrary, and arbitrary exceptions don't usually stand up under heavy scrutiny. The law shouldn't be about what you can shoot accurately and effectively, it should be about what you're allowed to have.
If I can own this in 30-30
what's the point of a law preventing me from having a larger firearm, in a smaller caliber? It won't be as concealable, it won't be as powerful.
Posted on 6/9/23 at 5:55 am to Scoob
I'm not for this BS but it has to do with capacity and reloadability. You'll end someone's day with that pistol but it'll be alot worse if you had a 10" AR in your backpack with a loaded drum. But of course crazies are gonna be crazy.
This post was edited on 6/9/23 at 5:56 am
Posted on 6/9/23 at 6:50 am to Scoob
quote:
How hard, once it's pinned and welded, is it to reverse,
Very hard, you’d be better off buying a new 16” barrel.
Posted on 6/9/23 at 8:53 am to udtiger
quote:I get that. I was just responding to the agency issue.
Act of Congress cannot supersede the Constitution.
Posted on 6/9/23 at 8:54 am to AlxTgr
quote:
Right, but short barreled rifles are covered by an act of Congress.
Except SBR's had a very specific definition that was also part of that act. Think there are now four injunctions against the ATF enjoining them from enforcement of this rule with at least one more injunction pending.
Posted on 6/9/23 at 10:17 am to Don Quixote
Only 0.6% to 1% have complied with the deadline.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/biden-and-atf-just-created-29-million-felons
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/biden-and-atf-just-created-29-million-felons
quote:
The owners of just 0.6% to 1% of AR-15-style pistols have complied with a May 31 deadline set by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to register their firearms.
quote:
According to ATF spokesman Erik Longnecker, “As of June 1, 2023, ATF received 255,162 applications for tax-free registration.”
Posted on 6/9/23 at 10:22 am to Landmass
Am I reading that right, there are over 40 million AR pistols? 
Popular
Back to top


2











