Will do.Originally Posted by 5pins
Will do.
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.
So according to some gun groups, there is a clause in there that states all foreign pistols that have been assembled with a brace is a direct violation of some law and those firearms must either be given to the ATF or destroyed as removing the brace will not make the gun complaint. Not a lawyer so its all above me. Lot of people not happy about it though.
@fracaction on IG breaks it down well.
From the ATF notice:
"The Department disagrees with the commenter who suggested that there will be financial implications resulting from the removal and replacement of imported parts for owners who imported pistols and added a “stabilizing brace.” The commenter incorrectly interpreted 18 U.S.C. 922(r) as requiring the removal and replacement of imported parts to comply with section 922(r). Section 922(r) generally makes it unlawful “for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle,” and 27 CFR 478.39 provides that a person may not assemble a semiautomatic rifle using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in the relevant aragraphs of the regulation. The criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 922(r) is for the “assembl[y]” of the semi-automatic rifle; herefore, modification of this kind of firearm through the removal of the relevant parts would not cure the 922(r) violation because the “assembl[y]” has already occurred. Nevertheless, for the purposes of the costs outlined in the standalone RIA, ATF assumes this group may use another scenario, such as destroying the firearm or turning it in to ATF, by using the population derived from bump-stock-type devices as a proxy."
Pages 246-247.
Like a 922r thing? I was looking into how SBRing a scorpion pistol could induce 922r questions that exist as a rifle/sbr but don't apply as a pistol
--Josh
“Formerly we suffered from crimes; now we suffer from laws.” - Tacitus.
This was quite dumb on their part. Now there is clear irreparable harm for owners of imported brace equipped guns.
I read the 922(r) comment in the final rule on the night of the 13th and also immediately thought of the sheer number of people who that’s going to affect. It seems even more arbitrary than the rest of this whole situation. So you’re saying that everyone who installed a brace on their pistol or purchased a braced pistol from a store either assembled or purchased an unregistered SBR, but you’re willing to let that felony slide and even allow them to register the gun tax free, but overlooking the associated 922(r) violation is a bridge too far? Seriously? That’s where we draw the line? I absolutely hate the “sporting purposes” bullshit stemming from the ‘68 Gun Control Act and if I could snap my fingers and make one gun control law disappear, it would be that. Everything from import bans to people scrambling to count compliance parts stems from that nonsense. A guy who put a brace on an AR or an MPX can take advantage of the amnesty and get a free tax stamp but a guy who put a brace on an imported AK, B&T, or CZ Scorpion has to destroy or surrender his property?
Last edited by WobblyPossum; 01-21-2023 at 10:47 PM.
Something .. something “arbitrary and capricious”
I think ATF just screwed themselves on this and this may be why it hasn’t appeared in the public viewing, much less been published, yet in the federal register.
Not to mention attempting to put out an amnesty that’s really a trap for anywhere between 700,000 and a few million of the people it’s supposedly intended for is going to make the compliance rate drop like a rock.
There is a much better email address for eForms issues. I can’t remember it with absolute certainty, but I have it at work. I’ll drop it here for you Monday.
To answers your last question on prints, yes, you will have to resubmit prints again on a new application. The cover letter they email you after submitting has your control number on it. If they kick back your form (I don’t believe they will so long as you uploaded the new RPQ as well), you would need to send in new prints to match your new submission control number.
I would be shocked if they disapproved your form for having the old version RPQ and the new version RPQ both uploaded. That is, unless you get an inspector having a bad Monday and wanting to flex on you. I’ve seen things get approved that shouldn’t have, and things get denied for absolutely petty reasons. All you can do is shrug, accept it, and start over. It’s the one good thing about paper forms, you get to make corrections for stupid simple mistakes everyone missed the first time.
Does anyone know if an HK 416 22lr pistol would be legal as long as there is no faux buffer tube installed? I’d rather not register it. I can’t find any 16” uppers or barrels for it. Could this still be sold as a pistol even? I was planning on selling this thing anyway now I’m not sure if it’s considered to be a SBR in the ATFs view.
Thanks.
I don’t usuall watch MAC videos, but this one came across my feed. No bueno.
Edit to add second video found that shows the rule as it’s written and how it would condemn these guns (and whoever put the brace on).
Cliff notes: Pull any braces off your imported pistols and don’t even think about submitting an eForm 1 under the amnesty offer.
Last edited by StraitR; 01-21-2023 at 11:20 PM.
Reply With Quote