ATF Singles out 23 SB tactical Firearms Braces...

[Totem Polar]

A corollary to this line of thought is if anyone has ever seen a gun mag review or test of a braced pistol where it was actually used as a brace and *not* a surrogate stock.

[WobblyPossum]

The bold part is not true in every case.

My understanding is that if a firearm is first assembled as a pistol, then it can be reassembled as a rifle, and re-reassembled as a pistol as often and as many times as desired.

So if an AR was assembled the very first time as an unambiguous, early-00s style pistol with a round receiver extension and nothing more on it than maybe a foam sleeve, it is eligible to be returned to a legal pistol configuration for all time. It can be made into a standard rifle without filing any special paperwork, or made into an SBR or AOW with a stamp. And you can go back and forth. You just have to be careful of the path you take transiting between states so you don't as an intermediate state assemble a configuration for which you have not acquired a stamp. As in, if you have a stamp for an SBR, don't let it be an AOW when changing from rifle to SBR or pistol.

However, if a firearm is first assembled as a rifle, then it is always a rifle. If a stamp is acquired, it can be reassembled as an SBR, because that is a subcategory of rifle, but it can never be a pistol.

So if this notice starts being used to make determinations that braced pistols are actually SBRs, then they will be and will have always been rifles in the eyes of BATFE.

However, if they were first assembled as unambiguous pistols with non-braced round receiver extensions, and the brace added later, then they could be converted back to pistols. I suppose that in that case, if a stamp was acquired and if the particular brace you used was one that worked with a round tube, rather than a "carbine" extension, you could go back and forth between pistol and SBR configuration simply by removing or reattaching the brace. It seems likely that BATFE will argue that a carbine RE is "objectively" intended to be used with a shouldering device, but it would be much harder for them to argue that a round tube without any additional device attached is "objectively" a stock.

I wouldn't want to go back and forth between configurations by changing the receiver extension, as that means messing with castle nut stakes every time you make a change, and likely a new castle nut and receiver end plate.

As always,

You are correct. I should have been more clear in that I was referring to pistols configured from the start with braces. If the ATF is now basically saying that braces are stocks or that a braced pistol is an SBR, then those guns were rifles from the start.

[Rex G]

Sidebar: is there anything in the current discussion, what we know of it, that would stop one from just pulling the brace off, adding a $6 foam sleeve, and driving on in early 2000s fashion? Asking for a friend that lives on a state border, and on the side that disallows carry of loaded rifles in cars, etc.

Well, it does appear that removing and destroying, or, surrendering the brace, is what BATFE is considering to be acceptable, according to the posted document. (I am not a lawyer.)

Not being a fan of the early-version SB Tactical brace, packaged as an manufacturer-included accessory with my DDM4 V7P, that part, at least, makes my situation less complicated. (The brace adds considerable bulk and length to the RE, which is already made longer by the LAW folder.) The interesting part will be to see what the BATFE considers to be acceptable forms of destruction, and whether they will require some type of documentation of the destruction.

I am not saying that all else is rosy, regarding this BATFE document.

[jetfire]

A corollary to this line of thought is if anyone has ever seen a gun mag review or test of a braced pistol where it was actually used as a brace and *not* a surrogate stock.

Fourth picture

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/...e-9-mm-pistol/

[5pins]

Fourth picture

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/...e-9-mm-pistol/

He dose not appear to be using the brace at all in that picture. He's just shooting it two handed.

[Rex G]

You are correct. I should have been more clear in that I was referring to pistols configured from the start with braces. If the ATF is now basically saying that braces are stocks or that a braced pistol is an SBR, then those guns were rifles from the start.

I share your concern. The BATFE document indicates that surrendering or destroying the offending brace would be acceptable, but, somewhere in the making of this sausage, will the result be that my DDM4 V7P ends up being retroactively considered an SBR, rather than a pistol, from the moment of its transfer, or, will I indeed be allowed handle this as a simple do-it-myself correction? (I am lucky, in that my early SBT brace is a simple friction fit, leaving a clean, slick RE, when the brace is simply pulled away. I already removed it, long ago, for reasons unrelated to the current legal issue, but have kept the brace stored separate from the weapon, in case something like this happened.)

I plan to replace the SBT brace with a Tail Hook, but am awaiting the outcome of this mess.

[jetfire]

He dose not appear to be using the brace at all in that picture. He's just shooting it two handed.

Eh, close enough. It's not being used as a stock.

Also don't refer to me in the third person like that, it's weird.

[Duke]

It doesn’t carry the weight of law....

And folks are already “I’ll just take it off”.

Cheebus


New Gadsden flag idea - a disposable mask with an earthworm on it

[5pins]

Eh, close enough. It's not being used as a stock.

Also don't refer to me in the third person like that, it's weird.

If anything you showed it's unnecessary by not using it.

I just tried shooting my SBA3 as a brace and it didn't work very well. The strap just barely made it around my arm and it came off after about five rounds. Not to mention aiming with it was awkward.

[jetfire]

If anything you showed it's unnecessary by not using it.

I just tried shooting my SBA3 as a brace and it didn't work very well. The strap just barely made it around my arm and it came off after about five rounds. Not to mention aiming with it was awkward.

This brace works as a brace, but also it's easier to shoot the pistol like a pistol, or shoulder it like a stock.