Pistol Brace Executive Order

[USMC3531]

Attachment 160108

He is a fed plant sent to gather info.

[HKusp 45]

I believe that ownership of it is a crime in itself. Something like 'constructive possession'? If I'm wrong, I welcome to correction.

Shit it was already assembled prior with the intent to have a pistol ...... so they can fuck themselves this is as others have mentioned a way to register more shit. Problem is none of my 80% builds have any identification on them to begin with sooooooooo.....

[Ilikebuckets]

Colion Noir has a good short video about the pistol brace amnesty letter and his take. Less than 5 minutes and I think he does a nice job summing up what it means.

[ray h]

Let me run this by the collective.
One of the ways to turn a pistol into an SBR is to add a rifle stock.
Can you add something other than a rifle stock onto an AR pistol buffer tube without it becoming an SBR.
Here's a for-instance, If someone had an AR pistol that came with a carbine buffer tube and SB3 brace. Can they remove the SB3, leaving the buffer tube, and place something on the tube that is similar to a rifle stock but isn't one, say if they have a crossbow that came with a proprietary crossbow stock that happens to fit a carbine buffer tube?
In short, would putting a proprietary crossbow stock on an AR pistol turn it into an SBR?
Here's what I think, the ATF says you can't add anything to a pistol with the intent of shouldering it, but a part from a crossbow (which in no stretch of the imagination falls under the purview of the ATF) would only be installed for looks and balance.

[PickingPA]

As I understand, this also applies to Micro Conversion Kits (MCK)

The sale/purchase/possession of the hunk of plastic isn’t illegal, but the minute you slide your legally owned handgun into the legally owned hunk of plastic… boom, illegal manufacture of an unregistered NFA item.

[EFK]

Colion Noir has a good short video about the pistol brace amnesty letter and his take. Less than 5 minutes and I think he does a nice job summing up what it means.

That is a very succinct and clear explanation of what seems to be going down. The real questions to my mind are (1) how many will actually comply, (2) how many will actually even know about it if this "rule" is enforced whether legal or no, and (3) what can congress do after the midterms - *if* either the house or senate or both swing R - to stop ATF from doing this?

[Emptymag]

Let me run this by the collective.
One of the ways to turn a pistol into an SBR is to add a rifle stock.
Can you add something other than a rifle stock onto an AR pistol buffer tube without it becoming an SBR.
Here's a for-instance, If someone had an AR pistol that came with a carbine buffer tube and SB3 brace. Can they remove the SB3, leaving the buffer tube, and place something on the tube that is similar to a rifle stock but isn't one, say if they have a crossbow that came with a proprietary crossbow stock that happens to fit a carbine buffer tube?
In short, would putting a proprietary crossbow stock on an AR pistol turn it into an SBR?
Here's what I think, the ATF says you can't add anything to a pistol with the intent of shouldering it, but a part from a crossbow (which in no stretch of the imagination falls under the purview of the ATF) would only be installed for looks and balance.

"...installed for looks and balance."


LOL! Good luck with that.

They wouldn't even allow any modifications (add/subtract velcro/ad a "filler" to the end of the brace/etc) to a brace, or it became a "stock" in the eyes of those writing the rules.

[PickingPA]

Just get your ATF doormat

[RUDY850]

does this effect a AR pistol that only uses a pistol buffer tube?

[HKusp 45]

does this effect a AR pistol that only uses a pistol buffer tube?

no they are strictly going after the brace so you could remove said brace and leave a pistol tube on it ...so essentially they are pissed that manufactures found a way around the whole SBR thing ( because well $200.00 aaaaaannnnnd they get to add it to the registry). Now they want to make sure they have a list and people pay for it. we will see what happens going forward because that "executive order" goes against the constitution in that there was no stipulation on type or style of arms.