ATF Proposed Rule Change: Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Braces

[Royinmontco]

Not that I disagree with your last paragraph, but what's the difference between a rifle and SBR besides 1.5" and $200?

The sad thing is, it's not as bad as just a 1.5" difference. An overall barrel length of ANYTHING under 16in is the difference. So a 16" barrel is a rifle, but even a 15.999in barrel is an SBR!

[DK23]

Nothing, it's just designed to restrict access for people to get these items. For some the $200 fee could be a barrier, honestly for me it's not the $200 stamp, it's the 9-12 month wait. I fall into the group of if I want something I buy it, and if I'm going to buy it I want it now. Hence why anything I've done so far NFA related has been Form1 stuff that has a much smaller waiting period than Form 4 stuff.

My point was that distinguishing between an SBR and AR pistol because of a brace and a strap is just as arbitrary as distinguishing a rifle and SBR because of 0.1", but they did. Until now apparently.

The sad thing is, it's not as bad as just a 1.5" difference. An overall barrel length of ANYTHING under 16in is the difference. So a 16" barrel is a rifle, but even a 15.999in barrel is an SBR!

Yep, I just used 1.5" because most SBRs I've heard about had 14.5" barrels or shorter.

[widgetman101]

The sad thing is, it's not as bad as just a 1.5" difference. An overall barrel length of ANYTHING under 16in is the difference. So a 16" barrel is a rifle, but even a 15.999in barrel is an SBR!

If you want to make it even more confusing add in bullpup guns to the mix. My PS90 is classified as a rifle but is shorter in length with a 16" barrel than my 10.5" Zev AR pistol. As of now the Zev could be loaded with a round in the chamber in my truck but the PS90 couldn't because it falls under a rifle. It really makes you wonder what jackass came up with all these dumbass rules.

[win67]

"This proposed change is patently illegal and will result in BATFE expending substantial resources to defend itself against legal action. If adopted, enforcing it will divert BATFE resources away from efforts that do have a connection to crime prevention and revenue enforcement. The change would benefit neither the financial interests of the United States, nor the operational flexibility of BATFE. Since the proposed regulation has no connection to any known dynamics of criminal activity which could justify the financial and operational costs, the change should not be adopted."

Thank you! Your comment has been submitted to Regulations.gov for review by the the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, And Explosives Bureau.

Comment Tracking Number:

[JoshIronshaft]

Finally got around to submitting my comment. Keep em goin!

[EBR]

If you want to make it even more confusing add in bullpup guns to the mix. My PS90 is classified as a rifle but is shorter in length with a 16" barrel than my 10.5" Zev AR pistol. As of now the Zev could be loaded with a round in the chamber in my truck but the PS90 couldn't because it falls under a rifle. It really makes you wonder what jackass came up with all these dumbass rules.

PS90's aren't as widespread as braced pistols though. Plus they shoot 5.7, which is a pistol round. It's a great round but it's not 5.56/.300 blk/7.62x39. And again not as widespread. Braced pistols they said 3-7 million. But that number is so low and off. The owner of SBA said he made well over 3 million of just the one type of brace they sell. They make at least 3 or 4. Plus the other companies that made them. Chinese copies bought. Real estimates are probably 20 million or more. Someone said 40 million. IDK. But far more than PS90's/bullpups are out there, I assume.

I make the point of how many there are of one vs another. Because both tax revenue, plus a list of guns is clearly the goal. Confiscation later? Call me a conspiracy theorist. But when the president says there's no point in going against a tyrant government as they have F15's/Nukes. And Chipman says anything semi auto magazine fed over .22 is an "assault rifle". It's hard to say chipping away category of guns in segments for banning, isn't the goal.

(They forgot about Vietnam/Afghanistan, and being matched by farmers and goat herders.. Most people in America are too comfortable to fight anyways. We could get into what the political climate would look like if the ATF/Government starts taking out innocents by accident. But I digress.)

That's why everyone should be commenting, even if they don't have a brace. Same for the receiver rules. They'll come for what you have next, until there's nothing left.

[ShadeRabbit]

Not sure how I didn't see this until today, but it's nice to see. Maybe it will affect the ATF's rubber stam, err, "decision making" process. Or not.

Looks like Toomey actually signed this, surprisingly (last page). Not sure which two Republicans did not. I saw Mittens' signature on it too. You can read the actual letter at the second link.



Biden administration's proposal to regulate pistol-stabilizing braces comes under fire from Republicans

"Nearly the entire Senate Republican caucus signed on to a letter Thursday demanding a withdrawal of a proposed ATF rule that would regulate some pistol-stabilizing braces."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep...ilizing-braces

https://thereload.com/app/uploads/20...-6.24.2021.pdf

[qmcorps]

Not sure how I didn't see this until today, but it's nice to see. Maybe it will affect the ATF's rubber stam, err, "decision making" process. Or not.

Looks like Toomey actually signed this, surprisingly (last page). Not sure which two Republicans did not. I saw Mittens' signature on it too. You can read the actual letter at the second link.



Biden administration's proposal to regulate pistol-stabilizing braces comes under fire from Republicans

"Nearly the entire Senate Republican caucus signed on to a letter Thursday demanding a withdrawal of a proposed ATF rule that would regulate some pistol-stabilizing braces."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep...ilizing-braces

https://thereload.com/app/uploads/20...-6.24.2021.pdf

When they had the Trifecta of Power in DC, the Rs could have easily removed the SBR from Law with some simple legislation.

The Rs only get balls when they see a fundraising opportunity.

Behold the opposition Party in action.