ATF Just Released Their Brace Ruling

[Pag23]

I am confused. If you have a 9mm carbine with a pistol brace, you now have to register it ??? Like an Extar EP9 is illegal now ??

Extar put out a public response on their Instagram page they are reviewing the wording and their new brace should meet the criteria.

So in a nutshell it appears you can own the brace just don't mount it on the Extar and replace it with a foam cheek rest.

[Ilikebuckets]

Compliance Date: Any weapons with *stabilizing braces* or similar attachments that
constitute rifles under the NFA must be registered no later than [INSERT DATE 120
DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

I'm guessing the date is today.

Not sure about that because of the first and last paragraphs.

On January 13, 2023, the Attorney General signed ATF final rule 2021R-08F, *Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached *Stabilizing Braces,** amending ATF*s regulations to clarify when a rifle is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.

The rule outlines the factors ATF would consider when evaluating firearms equipped with a purported *stabilizing brace* (or other rearward attachment) to determine whether these weapons would be considered a *rifle* or *short-barreled rifle* under the Gun Control Act of 1968, or a *rifle* or *firearm* subject to regulation under the National Firearms Act. The rule*s amended definition of *rifle* clarifies that the term *designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder* includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a *stabilizing brace*) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided other factors, as listed in the definition, indicate the weapon is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder.

This rule does not affect *stabilizing braces* that are objectively designed and intended as a *stabilizing brace* for use by individuals with disabilities, and not for shouldering the weapon as a rifle. Such stabilizing braces are designed to conform to the arm and not as a buttstock. However, if the firearm with the *stabilizing brace* is a short-barreled rifle, it needs to be registered within 120-days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

This rule is effective the date it is published in the Federal Register. Any weapons with *stabilizing braces* or similar attachments that constitute rifles under the NFA must be registered no later than 120 days after date of publication in the Federal Register; or the short barrel removed and a 16-inch or longer rifle barrel attached to the firearm; or permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the *stabilizing brace* such that it cannot be reattached; or the firearm is turned in to your local ATF office. Or the firearm is destroyed.

Please note that this is the text of the final rule as signed by the Attorney General, but the official version of the final rule will be as it is published in the Federal Register. The rule will go into effect once it is published in the Federal Register.



https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...ilizing-braces

[arjohnson]

According to what I read is that you can change the brace to a stock once approved. Not that I agree with what they did.

[bluetrane2028]

Attachment 163295

The wording I saw talks about "surface area" at the end of a buffer tube, which the tennis ball absolutely would be. Heck, the buffer tube itself has "surface area" so it could be argued that ALL PISTOLS WITH BUFFER TUBES are now "rifles."

Eff the ATF.

[fallenleader]

The wording I saw talks about "surface area" at the end of a buffer tube, which the tennis ball absolutely would be. Heck, the buffer tube itself has "surface area" so it could be argued that ALL PISTOLS WITH BUFFER TUBES are now "rifles."

Eff the ATF.

c'mon, you know they've never flipped back forth and to the left or right about a decision.
of course a tennis ball or the ass end of the friggin' rifle's action would not be considered a brace.
of course they wouldn't "clarify" that cheeking the tube is considered stabalizing the weapon.
of course they wouldn't come to your home to kill your dog.

[bluetrane2028]

The language in this ruling now defines "single pull of the trigger" and not "single function of the trigger."

So... it's a two-fer, now they have standing to ban binary triggers.

Neat.

[John_Wick]

https://maf-arms.com/product/magic-atf-ball/

I tried to post this to my own Facebook page and got c*ck blocked.

Posts that look like spam according to our Community Guidelines are blocked on Facebook and can't be edited.

[Emptymag]

what happens if you take off the brace and leave the buffer tube on something like an ak?

That's a good question.
I would think that's fine - it's just a tube - not a stock or brace, or canoe, or anything.
Not sure that it (buffer tube) having no actual functional purpose MEANS anything, but I wouldn't think so.
But I'm not a fucktarded fed either.

[USMC3531]

The wording I saw talks about "surface area" at the end of a buffer tube, which the tennis ball absolutely would be. Heck, the buffer tube itself has "surface area" so it could be argued that ALL PISTOLS WITH BUFFER TUBES are now "rifles."

Eff the ATF.

So make a buffertube that comes to a point at the end

[Emptymag]

Which makes me wonder. I'm sure there's hundreds of thousands of braced pistols sitting in gun shops across the country, which they won't be able to sell unless they have their SOT. Then they are going to have to be form 4, which means they're going to have a really hard time selling them.

This is going to create an unreasonable burden on small business owners.

Step 1 - Remove brace
Step 2 - Sell pistol the way pistols were sold prior to the existence of braces
Step 3 - Profit

I've seen a few pistols listed recently at various vendors that have the plain buffer tube, or the tube with foam cover.
Obviously in anticipation of this change.