We have to tighten things up where possible. I have no issue other than them circumventing the proper channels (if that’s what happened). $200 seems steep. Make people pay if they already have one and for new ones.

Personally I have a bigger issue with what NYS just did basically making large areas all a “safe space” and in order to carry or exercise you’re constitutionally protected right then the business must specifically put a state approved sign in front saying they allow concealed carry weapons. Otherwise, no sign means no carry. This is an issue to me.

In good news, NYS makes re-registering your permit every 3 years now instead of 5. And in certain areas you must take a course.

People are pissed, but this is the bare minimum as far as I’m concerned. Actually, this isn’t even the bare minimum but that’s just my opinion as a non-carrying CCW holder.

I've read that the $200 NFA stamp is waived so long as you register during the 120 day amnesty period.

Edit: There are a few of ways to looks at this:

1. This is bullshit that a previously legal item will make owners felons overnight. Government overreach! They want to register so they have a database of pistol braces owners. Fuck the ATF!

or

2. 99% of pistol brace users got the brace to not pay the $200 stamp and avoid the hassle etc to form 1 their firearm and register their pistol as a short barreled rifle. The ATF just gave everyone $200 discount to SBR their braced pistol! This is a huge win! Thanks, ATF!

or

3. A little of both.

---

Suffer Well.

JFC....what if they decide to skip processes for taxes or speech or a draft or quartering soldiers in your home

We are seeing the same happen with so called ghost guns also. Legal per the ATF. Local municipalities, counties, and state governments are crafting laws to make owners felons unless they turn them in.

??

I missed the word "other."

Sorry

Figured. All good! Too much deep dish to the dome compromising your reading amigo

This is my understanding as well.

What's not as clear to me is whether or not this "freebie" (but but muh registration...noted) SBR application (effectively what it is, right?) allows the owner to later swap out a brace for a proper stock. After all, if one of the ATF's goals is to bring braces under the SBR umbrella because it's how some owners (want to) use them, then what prevents those owners from taking full advantage of that designation?

Pictures of "the weapon being registered" (from the screenshot in the video) are part of this amnesty-period application deal, sure, but if there's language attached which locks out any future SBR configuration which the given serialized lower can ever be part of, that could make a significant difference in the owner's decision whether to save (multiples of?) $200 and apply...or destroy.

I don't own any NFA items, SBRs or otherwise, but people I know who do are not proscribed from altering them via non-serialized parts/accessory changes or moving same between setups which are already registered...at least that's what I think is true.

Lots can change before December, in any case.

[edit: you got to a similar place while I was drafting this]

That's a fascinating youtuber.

I like his 'let's go Brandon t-shirt'.

And he mentions "the anti-gun industry". What is that exactly?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

People who don't know what an SBR or pistol brace are.

My life-long dream of being the world renowned expert on third amendment jurisprudence comes to fruition?

I know what both are, but you are saying that there is an "industry" of people who don't know stuff about gun accessories and acronyms? How does this industry of people that don't know gun terms make money? Do they produce things? Physical things?



It is interesting how much gun folks feel that people who don't know the name of every single gun accessory, or gun part, or gun feature, or gun acronym are not qualified to discuss or challenge gun safety. And yet we allow people to have opinions and conversations on medical safety, car safety, work safety, aviation safety, etc without requiring every person to be first experts on medicine, autos, workplaces, and airplanes and the 50 million acronyms used in each profession.

kwazy.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I was being tongue in cheek.

I would assume that the "anti gun industry" is referencing the idea that a group of entities that "profit" off the idea that the "gun industry" is bad.

Sure, understood.

But I am wondering about this "anti gun industry." Compared to making and selling guns, is this 'anti-gun industry' a highly profitable endeavor? How exactly do they form a whole "industry"? Can I invest or buy stock in it?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

It would have more utility than some of the PhDs out there

Again, I am assuming because I am not the originator of the term, that it is being used as a sort of amorphous descriptor for companies or non profits that espouse an "anti-gun" or "gun control" rhetoric.


A quick research reveals the above. There are salaries being paid out to employees or members of those groups, potentially, as well as lobbying efforts that likely require expenditures of capital.

Sure, there are organizations that advocate for gun regulation and control. But I imagine that their total expenditures is a tiny, tiny fraction of one percent of what the manufacture and sales of guns makes, if that.

I just found it funny (and revealing) that the youtuber called these organizations an "industry."

Maybe a case of the pot calling the kettle black ...

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I want to be the Republican who throws darts at the dictionary and chooses the next bad word to scream really loud is a way not aligned to it’s definition.

Wow, that's really racist.

If you expand "industry" beyond money to include political power and influence, it's pretty easy to see the "anti-gun industry". Same thing exists in abortion, immigration, etc. Looking only at the sales $ statistics is overly simplistic/myopic.

Somebody made a great t-shirt that was based on those unhinged 2nd amendment t-shirts, but for the 3rd amendment. It was fantastic. Just the whole mess of fonts and everything. Really regret not buying one.

Ok, so I found out that the John Brown Fun Club on Etsy exists. And it is great.

https://www.etsy.com/...pla=1&gao=1&

The dictionary.com definition is below. None of it would seem to apply to lobbying groups. I'm sure the youtuber is just using it to make the anti-gun lobby look more organized and agenda driven than it actually is. Seems pretty disingenuous.


the aggregate of manufacturing or technically productive enterprises in a particular field, often named after its principal product:the automobile industry; the steel industry.
any general business activity; commercial enterprise:the Italian tourist industry.
trade or manufacture in general:the rise of industry in Africa.
the ownership and management of companies, factories, etc.:friction between labor and industry.
systematic work or labor.
energetic, devoted activity at any work or task; diligence:Her teacher praised her industry.

It's ridiculous to even have to articulate that there are several definitions of the word "industry" but yea well, this is slowtwitch and DSW is gonna be a pedant.


I'd operate under the idea that the Youtuber is referencing "b" but potentially it could be ''d'' as well.

You wouldn't associate a "lobbying group" with "any general business activity or commercial enterprise?" That seems pretty disingenuous.

Good question - my guess is that once it’s an SBR it can be configured anyway you want since you are registering the S/N of the lower receiver. Once that is done what difference does it make if you shoulder fire it with the brace or use a traditional butt stock that can be swapped out in under 10 seconds? For that matter you can swap the upper to a 16”+ barrel in another 10 seconds and it’s no longer an SBR even though it’s registered as one.

While I don’t think this proposed rule will survive - if it does I don’t have an issue with registering my braced AR as long as the fee is waived for current owners that purchased a brace when it was “legal” to do so without registering as SBR.

The organizations you listed are not for-profit and aren't creating anything of value. Referring to them as an, "industry" is just projecting.

I would strongly suspect that they are "creating something of value" to those that align with their beliefs.

Not to mention that their funding is a fraction of what the NRA gets, even when you exclude the Russian money. And there are many pro-gun groups and lobbying organizations besides the NRA.

So, you wouldn't consider the NRA part of the gun industry?

No, I wouldn't. I would consider a business or a commercial enterprise a for-profit endeavor.

Ok, so it's fair to say then that your disagreement with the Youtubers video regarding the recent ATF ruling primarily comes down to his use of the word "industry?" And that otherwise you think what he says makes sense regarding the recent ATF ruling?

The idiom "a hive of activity/industry" exists to reference a lot of people doing something.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/...of-activity-industry


Do we get on peoples cases because we think they mean an actual hive? Or do we think the bees are somehow exchanging currency for their honey? No, we don't.

Whoever said DSW was being pedantic was right. As are the rest of the people hung up on the usage of the term industry here. Oh, and just to be clear I don't literally think you're wrapped up in rope and dangling somewhere...that's not what I meant by "hung up"...just to be clear.

Carry on with the thread.

501 C 4, the NRA. 501 C 3, the financially embroiled BLM organization. Social influencers getting streaming revenue will get a sole proprietor or self employed 1099.

You all are intentionally being dicks.

The gun industry (makers), the airline industry (plane mfg's and airlines), beverage industry (Coke) have donations on file to political groups with those tax filings.

The break in the chain here is the lack of a profit motive when talking about your citizen groups like MADD. MADD doesn't have a product they're selling. AKA, they don't have a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Folks can successfully argue that industry is a part of climate action, people sell renewables tech and people buy it. You cannot do that with the NRA or an anti-gun group, they don't sell guns.

So.......here's how this works:

Product for sale by company (industry) -> influence via money -> lobbying group -> policy makers (conflict of interest is profit motive)
Community action -> influence via money -> lobbying group -> policy makers

If you think you can just keep saying something to try to make it true, you're stupid as fuck. So, keep saying that it's an "industry". It's not, and you look stupid for continuing to try to peddle that nonsense.

If you want to argue industry with information or opinions you're going to have to target Fox, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, and the profit centers for the peddling of *(mis) information.

The parents that sued after Sandy Hook............not part of a profit center.

Got it?

Got it, thanks for the clarifications.

Nah

I'm not really sure I'm invested enough to have a strong opinion on the ATF ruling. Certainly there are all kinds of regulatory bodies that make rules that don't have to be codified into law to exist. I'm not sure why he is so hung up on that point.

You didn't ask me my stance on guns, but I'll give it anyway so you don't have to lump me in with others. I fully support the 2nd amendment and the right to own guns. I grew up around guns, hunting and clay pigeons mostly. I still own several guns, but haven't fired one in decades. If my FIL dies before I do, I will suddenly own 100s of guns. I don't possess the romantic affection for guns that some have and have trouble understanding it. That's ok. I'm sure many people don't understand how I can have an affection for bicycles.

What I do have a problem with is the kneejerk reaction to any kind of legislation on guns. That's the category I put this video in. I don't think he really cares handicapped users. I don't think he really cares about the rule vs. law issue. I don't think he really cares about people suddenly becoming felons. I don't think he really cares that they are using the definition of amnesty incorrectly. At the risk of overusing the the word, I think these arguments are all disingenuous, just like referring to the anti-gun lobby as an industry. Without knowing anything about the guy beyond this video, I suspect this guy would oppose any new gun regulations. It sounds to me like he is using his legal expertise to make his opposition to this rule sound noble.

This is all just my opinion. Feel free to feel differently. As I said above, I'm not really invested enough in this issue to get into a long debate about it.

I don't really disagree with anything you write above with the very mild exception of the "industry" semantics issue. I would say I feel similarly regarding guns and while I own a few I also do not romanticize their ownership and/or use. I do, however, fire them consistently. Ultimately YTers are after views and engagement, and this type of video resonates with the people that will give him views and engagement. I've watched some of his videos previously but not consistently and don't often look to the Youtubers for telling me what I should or should not be outraged about.

I do think there are reasons to be concerned about this rule change even though I fully admit that the "pistol brace" is a laughable work around to avoid the tax stamp and regulation associated with short barrel rifles.

Do think the pistol brace is really a work around to SBR? People bought AR pistols well before there were pistol braces. I've never shot an AR pistol, but they had buffer tubes you could rest against you shoulder. Do they have significantly more kick than an ar15 rifle? I suspect they were not uncomfortable to shot, Probably more comfortable than a lot of 30 cal. rifles.

Not a gun expert, but what is the big advantage to a SBR?


For civilian use.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Do you understand that theses braces do not affect the firing or rate of fire of a pistol? They do not make the pistol more of a danger. The just allow the pistol to be strapped to the forearm for stability.

How exactly does this change tighten anything up. It just forces millions of people to register guns which was never the purpose of the ATF.

I missed that the $200 was waived. I don't believe your statement that 99% of pistol brace owners got the brace to avoid the tax. AR pistols were very popular before pistol braces were sold. They are a fairly new item being invented in 2012.

I would think it relates to home defense. But we are not talking about SBRs. We are talking about pistols. If you remove the brace (which is not part of the gun), it has a short barrel like any other pistol. And as a pistol there is no NTF restrictions.

NTF?

Do you mean National Firearms Act?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Yes i meant NFA.

Yes, I 100% believe that the brace was a thinly veiled "stock" for a short barreled AR.

As you know, shooting an AR pistol with the "brace" against your shoulder has been, by some interpretations, illegal, because the moment it's shouldered, the brace is a stock and it immediately is an unregistered SBR, which is a felony offense. Does shooting a rifle or shotgun without shouldering it immediately convert the object into a pistol?

ATF has been inconsistent and flip flopping on this issue with conflicting information for years. It's a mess.

I've read it in a couple of locations that the $200 be waived (other places have doubts that the Federal Government would miss a chance for cash), but we might have to wait until the details will emerge until December. (maybe... this was supposed to happen on Aug 1)

As far as the 99%, I admittedly pulled that out of my ass based upon my interactions with those that have them and use them.

The brace was originally conceptualized (maybe?) or under the guise of (maybe more correctly?) to aid one handed shooting for those with a disability. This is exceptionally rare.

And sure there are some advantages that a pistol has that a SBR doesn't (depending upon the requirements), for example:
-you can have a loaded pistol in a vehicle, but you can't a rifle (short barrel or otherwise)
-you can cross state lines with a pistol, but you must notify the ATF if you want to travel across state lines with a SBR (or other NFA firearm/item)
-hunting regulations (not touching that one)

But, come on, there is a reason why so many braces look like stocks... and there is a reason the ATF has been flip flopping on how it is used (shouldering it vs forearm brace) doesn't change the design or classification.

Is your experience different?

---

Suffer Well.

As you say, i think they flipflopped on these issues. Its hard to find, but i believe the ATF said touching the shoulder with the brace or buffer tube was not illegal, but may have changed that.

i've never seen anyone using a brace or ar15 pistol at the range.

If i owned one of these braces it would suck since I travel to another state to shoot. If NFA requires notification than that would make ownership pointless.

This started years ago and will not go anywhere.Joe and Co. are trying their darndest to restrict ,wasted effort on the braces.
ATF Changes Their Mind (Again, and Again, and Again)
Then, in 2015, the ATF abruptly announced that they were reversing course and ruled that how the user uses the brace determines its classification (NFA or non-NFA). When used as intended, with a velcro strap that secures the brace to the shooter’s forearm, it is legal to own. When shouldered as a buttstock, it’s an NFA item. This just added to the confusion because it not only left the classification up to the user, but it contradicted their ruling of just one year prior.

SB Tactical and SIG Sauer initiated a legal battle with ATF, searching for clarification. Finally, in 2017, AFT relented and admitted that a user must physically “reconfigure” the brace in order for it to change categories from pistol to short-barreled rifle. Simply holding it in a different manner does not change the category. Score a victory for SB Tactical.

So braces were legal again, that is until August of 2020 when a firearms manufacturer named Q released an AR-style pistol with an SB Tactical brace called the Honeybadger. Shortly after its release, ATF sent a cease-and-desist letter to Q informing them that the Honeybadger was a short-barreled rifle and required a tax stamp to own. Q moved quickly and issued a $200 refund to all owners (the cost of the tax stamp), and also took legal steps with the ATF to clarify the situation.

With mounting pressure from gun owners as well as Congress, the Department of Justice stepped in and announced a 60-day hold on the decision about braces, pushing the date back past the presidential election.

In December of 2020, DOJ issued a new, 16-page “proposal” on braces, and allowed for public comment before enacting it. The public acted swiftly, with over 60,000 comments on the website in just 17 days, nearly unanimously against the proposal. In a stunning move, the DOJ reversed course and withdrew the proposal. Another win for gun owners.

DOJ still says that changes are “pending”, so that could happen at any time. In fact, the day before writing this, President Joe Biden announced several recommended gun control moves, one of which is classifying stabilizing braces as NFA items. As of this printing, he has not signed any executive orders, but it may happen soon.

On the youtubes...

---

Suffer Well.

Thanks for the synopsis. Very helpful.

Pink? That phrase has no racist origin or meaning.

---

"...the street finds its own uses for things"

Yes, it was a joke. Colion Noir is black. I was curious if DSW had watched the video, which was subject of this thread.

Of course l watched the video.

And l watched a few others by him too. Colion, while he seems to hate Biden and clearly distorts reality with terms like the anti gun "industry", seems mostly competent.

I think though that since he is African American, that if he ever uses one of his firearms to defend himself, the NRA and the gun actual industry will leave him to twist in the wind ...

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Possibly, but I doubt it.

Has the NRA gone to bat for many African American legal gun owners who ended up using their firearms to defend themselves against white assailants or white police officers?

If yes, I would be interested to learn about these cases. Surely, there have been many such cases where the NRA got involved or made public statements. Got any links?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I don't know, I haven't looked it up. But given that he has 2.2m subscribers and works with many "industry" manufacturers my ASSumption is that were he to legally use his firearm to defend himself the "industry" would not "leave him to twist in the wind."


I never made any particular assertions that there existed "many cases." I was making a specific assertion in THIS case based on the context of Colion Noir's position in the "industry."

Understood.

But, it is an interesting question more generally:

Has the NRA gone to bat much for black legal owners who use their legal guns to defend themselves?

If no, why not?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I don't know.

I'll set the bait........as soon as an incident occurs....

white = good guy with a gun argument
black = criminals with guns argument

Not that I necessarily believe in some massive gun conspiracy on that, just going ahead and posting the logical endpoint of the thought to get it over with.

To honestly think on that one, I do wonder if socioeconomic status might play more into it than race.

Has the NRA defended any americans who used their legal guns to protect themselves?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

No conspiracy, but race has lots to do with it:

"According to Dr. Potter, the NRA has a long history of supporting gun control laws, advocating for a deterioration of gun rights for nonwhite people and an expansion of gun rights for law enforcement — as a leading proponent of the 1938 Gun Control Act, and gun control measures amid the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King in the 1960s. “What speaks volumes here is that in response to the murder of MLK, the NRA chose to advocate for gun control. They did not choose to highlight the fact that MLK had attempted to become an owner of firearms after his home was bombed in 1956 — but he was denied,” she said. “After being denied a firearm for self-defense in his own home, community members began an armed watch outside of his residence. This set the stage for the modern battle between white rights and black rights under the Second Amendment."

more here:
https://atlantablackstar.com/...complicated-history/

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I don't think it's in the NRAs purview to legally defend an individual American's use of firearms in a protection/defense scenario.

Other gun organizations regularly make statements supporting individuals:

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Well then you need to be more clear about what you are asking as it seems that you are asking if the NRA will make a social media post regarding the use of a firearm. I assumed you meant legally defend.

I didn't even have to look hard

So I guess the answer is "yes" the NRA will "defend" a POC in the scenario you mention.

Sorry for the lack of clarity.

Yes, I meant "defend" in the media and/or on social media and/or by campaign and/or by email and/or by text, etc.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

"what is the big advantage to a SBR?"


It is short.

What is the big advantage of that? Easier concealment? I assume there is trade off with a shorter barrel?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Concealment and ease of movement in close quarters are the benefits.

A shorter barrel results in lower bullet velocity. A 20" barrel will give you a little over 2,940 fps. A 16" barrel will give you around 2,740 fps. A 10" barrel will give you around 2,520 fps. It's still gonna kill.

Depends. Concealment is one. Maneuverability, especially in tight spaces is another (like a clearing a building). Shorter overall length when using a suppressor often a reason. It looks like the rifles used by real action guys use is another.

The minimum barrel length for a rifle is 16 inches from breech face to end of the barrel. Some people use a 14.5 inch barrel with a permanently attached muzzle device to make the barrel 16 inches and keep out of the hassles related to a SBR. Some braced pistols have barrels that are as short 5.5 inches. Some 7 inches. Many are in the 9 to 12.5 inch size.

For all of those reasons, 16 inch barrel has become very common lately for civilian AR rifles. The M16A2 I was issued when I joined the Marines had a 20 inch barrel. The M4 that replaced it has a 14.5 barrel.

Trade offs to a shorter barrel are when used with the 5.56/.223 round, the shorter the barrel has a lower muzzle velocity when used with the same ammunition and therefore range/accuracy. Both the 20 inch barrel and 14.5 inch one are accurate enough in the most common engagement ranges of under 300 meters. Also there needs to be some changes to the gas system/buffer spring differences the timing of the 8 step firing cycle as ammunition is optimized around the longer barrels.

Many of the really short barreled AR pistols don't use 5.56. Some use 300 Blackout or 6.5 Grendel. There are some AR pistols that use 9mm. I'm not well versed in the non 5.56 AR/military platforms.

---

Suffer Well.

Good info, thanks.

But why would a civilian who is purchasing a rifle for personal use (such as home defense, sport, or hunting) need to worry about concealment and clearing a building?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Just say what you want to say. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain you have something in mind.....

Maneuverability at home for ease of defense if needed. Kind of why short barreled shotguns are chosen for hone defense. Mosberg shockwave is 14”.

I did have anything to say, I more had a question: why would a civilian purchasing a rifle for personal use (such as home defense, sport, or hunting) need to worry about concealment and clearing a building?



ps. I watched some videos on SBRs and the whole pistol brace issue. I can agree with gun nutters on at least one thing: US state and federal regs on firearms are a complete and utter mess. And then to have different laws apply when a person moves from one part of the usa to another is just a further cluster. All of the laws should be re-written, we should start from scratch. And we should not have state by state gun regs, we should have one set of simple federal regs for the entire country. Rant over.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Ok, that makes sense.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I wouldn't be too worried about "concealment" but maneuverability is key. Clearing a building would just be a vague term to describe making sure no one is in your home and getting around corners (i.e. looking around a corner with your firearm ready) is easier with a shorter barrel.

One thing that movies get very wrong is the volume, if you had to fire a shorter barreled rifle (or handgun, or really any firearm) in your house with no ear protection you would likely be in pain from the noise level. And the shorter barrel rifles are WAY louder.

NRA provides help if you pay for Carry Guard insurance.
. http://graphics.nra.org/wayne/7445-d.html

They also have grants from a civil rights defense fund.
. https://www.nradefensefund.org/request-help/

I can only imagine. I have been at an indoor range with earplugs and over ear hearing protection over that, and the folks firing a full length semi auto rifle next to me were indeed very, very loud.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

A suppressor is very good addition to any rifle.
Comes in many flavors

I have never used one, but sounds very wise.

Do they have a limited life?
Or essentially unlimited, unless they break?

Any additional regulatory requirements to purchase or own one?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Silencers do have to be cleaned and serviced from time to time.

Silencers are illegal in eight states.

In the other states, you must purchase a $200 tax stamp for each silencer.

If you get caught with a silencer and haven't paid the tax, expect to go to prison for a few years.

Definitely one of the dumbest laws/rules I can think of. Safety precautions are rarely a felony but then again...

$200 annually or a one time fee?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

One time for that owner.

---

Suffer Well.

Can’t believe you have to ask this. And in this forum. This should be basic knowledge but you just don’t get it…

It allows someone to challenge themself and combine three different sports for exercise and fun. Also an excuse to wear tight clothing.

Let’s not derail the thread though. And aim surprised Blep hasn’t been triggered yet.

I had to read that a few times before I got the joke. Time for coffee.

3 Points.

Must be due to that "intellectual dishonesty due to your bias", or whatever that means ...

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

 asking for a friend who owns a CZ Scorpion with a brace. Does my friend have to register it, pay $200? Is there in fact a grace period?

I believe the actual rule was as predicted. Pistol braces are now qualify any gun with a barrel shorter than 16" as a "short barrel rifle" and must be registered under the Natiional Firearms Act of 1934 (I think, don't quote me).

Uproar and lawsuits as predicted.

There is a 120 day "free period" for people with a braced "sbr" to register them with the ATF.

The 120 day window starts once it is published in the Federal Registry. Not sure how long it takes for that to happen.


https://www.justice.gov/...ssories-used-convert

---

Suffer Well.

It should be published today or tomorrow.

I have a CZ Scorpion and it falls into the category, but wait a couple months laws suits should put this on the back burner, they have brought this pony show out before.

** how is it possible for the ATF process millions of “brace applications “ ?.?., once you file and after 88 days of a open back ground check is a automatic disapproval then comes a enforcement action.
Now you have a SBR and you are a criminal.

jimatbeyond wrote:

It should be published today or tomorrow.

I don't see it on the Federal Register yet.

https://www.federalregister.gov/

---

Suffer Well.

I am thinking that the ATF is reconsidering this rule due to recent ruling on bumpstocks.

I’m watching this as well.

Brigade Arms 9mm with 10.5” barrel and a brace.

2nd favorite after my JP 9mm PCC.

ATF just announced that the rule should be published on January 31.

https://www.federalregister.gov/...d-stabilizing-braces


The rule was just published.

Let the lawsuits begin.

I can't see this lasting very long under heavy scrutiny/pressure.

At least two lawsuits were filed today.

** how is it possible for the ATF process millions of “brace applications “ ?.?., once you file and after 88 days of a open back ground check is a automatic disapproval then comes a enforcement action.
Now you have a SBR and you are a criminal.

The above is the gem of this entire thread. The ATF has no ability to process these applications timely. You submit an application and you have incriminated yourself.

Don’t not Comply.
5 States don’t allow SBR
Also ATF can’t make Laws

My impression is that you would have to submit the application within 120 days, not that you'd have to have the tax stamp in hand.

Just curious why you have a problem with a private business controlling the use of firearms on property they control or own? I don't separate "use" from "carrying", carrying is part of overall use, you don't carry unless you are prepared to use it.

Do you feel your right to bear arms supersedes the rights of others to have full control over their property? Like if you went into a business and just started shouting obscenities would you feel it's unfair if they asked you to leave? I would feel like a business having the ability to control firearms (behavior of customers they feel is objectionable or unsafe) is in the same spirit. All the state did is make this easier for businesses to implement by stating the default is "not allowed".

A private business has every right to control their property. It's generally accepted if they post a sign saying no firearms, then you either don't carry in that establishment or don't enter. The difference here is that the state is saying all business are no carry.

Maryland is doing the same thing as NYS. There is a bill in the senate that essentially makes MD a gun free zone. It's an over reaction to the Bruen decision turning MD into a shall issue state. Lawsuits are prepped and ready if it passes. I'm sure everyone shooting each other in Baltimore will gladly disarm if it passes....

Which other constitutionally protected rights do you lose upon entering a private business?

That's the likely argument anyway.

State of Texas, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, and Brady Brown vs. BATFE, United States Department of Justice, and Steven M. Dettelbach (Director of the BATFE)


This lawsuit was filed today in the 5th Circuit and appears to be the most comprehensive of all the lawsuits filed so far.

Thanks for update. Im waiting for now.

I went to a couple shops this weekend. Im not really sure of the process, aside that I need to fill out a form1.

I think there are some photo and fingerprinting involved. And a notary.

Do I need to get the pistol engraved with a new serial number?

I was hoping there was a local shop that could guide me through the transaction for a small fee.

I would highly recommend not filing a Form 1 until the 120 days is almost up. The pistol brace rule is going to be stopped by all of the lawsuits.

The easiest thing to do is remove the brace from your pistol and put it somewhere that isn't close to the pistol (maybe even at a friend or relative's house).

Another option would be to remove the upper receiver from your pistol and install a new upper receiver that has a barrel that is 16 inches or longer. It would then be a regular rifle and not subject to this rule.

Your pistol has a serial number and does not need another one.

I'm sure all of this is exactly what the framers of the Constitution intended.

If you read what the framers wrote, you would know that all firearms would be allowed to be owned by the people.

What? That's not at all what the framers wrote.

That's absurd, like many of your claims about firearms.

Just for starters, the 2nd Amendment does not mention "firearms". Nor does it support unlimited access to arms.
I'm a gun owner and 2nd Amendment supporter who is appalled by fetishists like you.

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/...the-2nd-amendment/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CArms%E2%80%9D%20comes%20from%20Middle%20English,in%20the%2014th%20Century.

For example the article has the following quote from George Mason:

No man has a greater regard for the military gentlemen than I have. I admire their intrepidity, perseverance, and valor. But when once a standing army is established in any country, the people lose their liberty. When, against a regular and disciplined army, yeomanry are the only defence,–yeomanry, unskilful and unarmed,–what chance is there for preserving freedom?

But it is obvious that George Mason was flat out wrong here. Personal firearms only hurt freedom in the country.

Just seems odd to point to an article that is basically “hey the founding fathers were wrong, let’s listen to these wrong people.”

How do you think the Supreme Court will rule on assault weapon bans?

What did they write?

Ohh, well that question is divorced from history, logic, and law. That is a question of politics.

What is your opinion on the likelihood of upholding the bans?

Removed the brace from my 9mm “pistol”.

Not going to bother with the pistol buffer tube. Inoperable for now. See how this shakes out.

It’s a 10.5” barrel. May just get a suppressor pinned on there permanently, bringing me to 16”, vs new upper/barrel.

Just make sure that the brace isn't anywhere near the pistol.

It worked in the 5th Circuit 💪🏽
More to follow
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the Biden administration’s rule from going into effect for the gun owners and groups who filed the lawsuit. The order came shortly before a deadline that would have required people to register stabilizing braces and pay a fee, or remove the braces from their weapons.

That's the key part of your post. The 5th didn't extend their temporary block beyond those who participated in the lawsuit.

---

Suffer Well.

The judge has been asked to clarify who is protected by the ruling. The judge will be issuing this clarification on June 2.

Another judge in the 5th Circuit just issued an injunction against the pistol brace rule. It is also for the plaintiffs only.

One more case left to see if we can get a nationwide injunction.

Took my brace off, never registered.

I’ll wait and see how this ends up.

I would recommend that you give the brace to a friend that doesn't have an AR pistol.

I find it interesting to hear law-abiding gun owners discussing how to evade the law.

There is nothing illegal about giving a pistol stabilizing brace to a friend.

What part of this is against the law? And if you can point me to the law about pistol braces, I would appreciate it.

---

Suffer Well.

What is the point of giving it to a friend?

Given the lack of clear understanding of the ATF's ruling and the conflicting and changing statements from the ATF Director and the ATF's website, many are concerned that simply removing the brace will not put them in compliance. Although the ATF Director said this was acceptable to Congress, the written guidance, which has changed at least twice since the ruling was first published, says differently.

The concern is that having both a brace and a pistol in the same location could be considered Constructive Possession.

Edit: Current ATF website (it has changed twice since 1/31):


ATF Director's testimony (26 sec mark):



"Detaches weapon from the brace and keeps them apart."

That's different than remove and and dispose or alter.

---

Suffer Well.

So it may not be currently against the law, the point of giving it to a friend would be to evade the law as it might currently be interpreted or in the future. I think EB makes a valid point.

And that's why he said evading the law instead of breaking the law.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Maybe the ATF Director has a clearer understanding than anyone, see my edit in the above post.

---

Suffer Well.

It just reminds me of when folks have a tuner car that won't pass emissions in their county so as a grown adult registers their vehicle in their parent's address like they're a 40 year old living at home in a county in the sticks that doesn't have emission testing.

Judge O'Connor in the Mock vs. Garland case just clarified that the injunction applies to all members of the Firearm Policy Coalition, all customers of Maxim Defense, the named plaintiffs and the other people that live with them.

There will be more next week as we see a chink in the ATF tin-foil armor.

The 120 day amnesty is over and grand total of 0.6%-0.8% registered their pistols to the SBR category.

The ATF is reporting that 255,162 people filed a Form 1 during the amnesty period.

That is mass non-compliance.

Man, the, "law and order" party is going to be outraged.

Or they just removed them.

Removal of the pistol brace isn’t enough. You would need to get rid of it or destroy it.

I would guess that several million people don't pay attention to the changing ATF rules and have no idea that their pistol with a stabilizing brace attached is now a felony.

Ah, my misunderstanding.

I think you are right, most people are just not watching the rules changing.

Even the police here in MD didn't realize the new restrictions on CCW.

Earlier you said "I would recommend that you give the brace to a friend that doesn't have an AR pistol."

Maybe you could "get rid of it" by "giving" it to a "friend". Nudge, nudge, wink wink, "law-abiding" indeed.

I think the ATF director, in testifying to congress, said that you could simply remove the brace and "keep it separate". This is different than what was previously written. Based on his testimony, you wouldn't need to destroy the brace nor give it to another person.

. https://www.youtube.com/...u7eUTw?feature=share

Stay away from these clowns at the range 😜
In the foreground pic was cropped there is another rifle not pointed down range

That looks like the Range Master, which makes it a double WTF?

---

"...the street finds its own uses for things"

Long live the SBR , the ATF rule is dead.

The ATF will appeal this ruling to the 5th Circuit Court and they will rule in favor of the plaintiffs.

The ATF will then appeal to the Supreme Court and they will rule in favor of the plaintiffs.

All of the ATF's interpretations of laws are about to come tumbling down. Bumpstocks will not be machineguns. Forced reset triggers will not be machineguns. 80% frames and receivers will not be firearms.

ATF just got kicked in the teeth again. Their partial frames and receivers rule just lost in the VanDerStok v. Garland case.

The Supreme Court will be holding a conference tomorrow to decide if the VanDerStok case should be granted certiorari.

It only takes four votes to get it on to its next step.

I can easily see the court making a decision in the Cargill case and then doing a GVR on VanDerStok.

Obviously, the companies that produce and sell anti-guns.