My thought would be, if you’re worried it’s a trap, then submit your eForm and trash your braces. In other words, do the option of removing and rendering them unable to reinstall (or whatever the exact language was). If you’re super worried, remove the receiver extensions from your AR pattern “pistols” altogether and literally throw the braces in the trash while you wait for your stamps. Should you be denied, and they show up to seize your unregistered NFA item you so kindly sent them pictures of, there are none to be found outside some constructive possession weaksauce if they really felt like hemming you up.Originally Posted by The Rat;[URL="tel:1443369"
BillSWPA is correct. Even if ATF wanted to "gotcha" people like this getting an Assistant U.S. Attorney and a U.S. Magistrate on board with prosecuting people who were making reasonable efforts to comply with a new legal provision based on a "timed out" background check is a non starter. That's if this 88 day thing is even real and not simply a GOA fundraising boogeyman.
Thanks for the responses y'all. I was thinking it would be a bit farfetched to have that kind of 'gotcha' across so large a populace, but it's difficult to get a more reasoned discussion about this elsewhere online.
The atf and doj is way too trustworthy to pull any shenanigans like that against a compliant flock of citizens.
Are you loyal to the constitution or the “institution”?
And still nothing in the Federal Register or public inspection section…
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
I am wondering which US Attorney would sign up for prosecuting a pistol brace case that is the result of an amnesty application expiring because the BATFE is deluged with new Form 1 applications due to the same amnesty. Setting aside the rest of the legal concerns around the lawfulness of BATFE's new rule, I do not imagine many US Attorneys want to risk their conviction records and limited resources on such a case. I am sure there is one who thinks such action will make him or her electable to some public office, but I cannot imagine there are too many.
I suppose it does raise one question though. What does a person do if they've submitted an eform 1, the waiting time goes past the 120 days, and the eform gets denied on some dumb technicality/website glitch?
Because I have had eforms get denied because I didn't have one document or another uploaded, when I definitely did. (I assume website glitch, didn't take the upload properly.) On a regular eform 1 that's not a huge deal, you just resubmit with whatever corrections you needed to make. But this situation could be more touchy, depending on denial timing.