Ah! I looked back a few posts and it all seemed to be about the form filing. Also, I never got into the brace thing so I'm not really keeping up with this topic. Just passing on what new things I hearOriginally Posted by Caballoflaco
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
I think you’re misunderstanding. The crime of violating 922(r) is to assemble a semiautomatic rifle or shotgun that would be illegal to import in that configuration as long as it has more than 10 imported parts out of a list of 20. We can import “pistols” because they aren’t rifles so people don’t have to worry about 922(r). If adding a brace to a pistol retroactively makes it a rifle, then every single imported pistol that had a brace installed at any point after coming to America is a violation. They were pistols when they got here and were assembled into rifles after arrival by the addition of the brace which is now a buttstock. It doesn’t matter if the manufacturer, importer, distributor, dealer, or final owner installed the brace. Once the brace was added, the ATF is saying it’s a 922(r) violation and this rule doesn’t provide amnesty for that law so the firearm is contraband and must be surrendered or destroyed.
ETA: the only exception would be if the person who installed the brace swapped in enough US made parts before doing so that the resulting rifle wasn’t a 922(r) violation. How you would prove that to the ATF is another question. Also, no one would have done that because until now the ATF said adding a brace to a pistol didn’t make it a rifle so people wouldn’t have had reason to do their 922(r) parts swapping prior to installing the brace.
I know what 922 is. Played that game with FALs and AKs. Just the way I heard it said seemed like referring to manufacturer and not purchaser
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
18 USC 922(r)says:
r)It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes...
While some people say 922r is "only for importers" there's nothing in the statute to suggest that. People have been coasting by not thinking about 922r, but I think only because it's so difficult to enforce. The actual statute is clear that it applies to anyone.
Although this new rule is a mess, I think the ATF's flippant response that "well obviously all these 922r violating foreign SBRs will need to be turned in or destroyed" (paraphrasing) shows that they take it very seriously if given the chance.
Also, as someone pointed out, it's odd that, from the ATF's perspective, they're willing to play it cool about NFA-violating unregistered SBRs, but not 922r violations. Could be more evidence of incompetence in the drafting of this rule, or a clue that future anti-gun action will be focused on importation.
Yes, 922r is about the manufacturer and not the buyer, but (big BUT here) this new Brace rule states that once an imported pistol has been configured with a brace (aka made into an NFA item with no stamp) it has violated 922r and can NEVER be reconfigured to be legal pistol (removing brace) or registered as a legal SBR via amnesty program.
Bottom line, someone or some entity is guilty of violating 922r here, and they are not offering amnesty for these items. Check out the second video I added in post #460. Link….
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....=1#post1444032
My understanding has always been that 922(r) applies to everyone who is configuring a firearm into a configuration that would be banned from importation. This link explains it pretty well specifically with regards to turning imported pistols into SBRs. About three decades ago, the ATF issued a letter saying it didn’t apply to the NFA. Every subsequent letter became less lenient with the most recent one saying it definitely does apply to NFA firearms. If we say the most recent letter takes precedence then there is a big 922(r) issue. If we say the contradictory letters just cancel each other out, then we have to default to the text of the statute which clearly says 922(r) applies to anyone assembling a semiautomatic rifle or shotgun with imported parts.
ETA: I’m not a lawyer or in the firearms industry, I’m just a fed. I’d be happy to be proven wrong. I’m unaware of any prosecutions involving violations of 922(r) and have definitely never heard of case law regarding it. I’m just going by the text of the statute and the ATF letters.
Right. I don’t think anyone is debating 922r and to whom and how it applies to imported firearms. I think the discussion is that it’s now being used in this new brace rule for what reads like the choice of ATF seizure or voluntary destruction lest you become subject to prosecution, regardless of 922r has been prosecuted historically.
In that case I misunderstood the first sentence of your post that I quoted. I apologize.
My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.
No worries at all. Often, what I type out is clear as a bell to me, but turns out clear as mud for anyone trying to read it.
Yes but how do you tell if the handgun had a brace?
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote