ATF Just Released Their Brace Ruling

[Lemanshooter]

*****

[HanzMcFeely]

“Harm none, and do what thou will shall be the whole of the law…”

[JaySmith]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uTCgBq2ibY8

[GOYABEAN]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uTCgBq2ibY8

anim_rofl2.gif

[HKusp 45]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uTCgBq2ibY8

[HanzMcFeely]

Your inbox is full

[TwistedCopper]

So I am at a LGS today, and we start discussing the ATF brace rule. He said that if you read through the rule, there's also mention of optics and sights designed for a rifle that could qualify your pistol as a SBR. I said I just always use the Magpul MBUS flip up deals and he said yeah you'll not be in compliance with this rule if you leave them on past the 120 day grace period. Then he tells me that the rule states any optic or sights that are designed for a rifle with a fixed eye relief would make it an SBR just like a brace would. He said they consider the typical AR "peephole and post" to be in that category. Then he said a red dot sight is okay because it's not magnified so it's eye relief isn't limited.

Is that correct? This ATF over reach is already over the top, but are they seriously saying I can't have flip up sights on my 10.5" AR pistol? What about 3-dot pistol sights? I never saw a set for an AR pistol, but if this guy was correct and these lawsuits fail, then is a red dot my only option? Someone please get my blood pressure down and tell me this guy was wrong...

(EDIT)
From the near-100 page over reach (Page 6543 of the Federal Register) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...2023-01001.pdf
Therefore, some of the sights listed onWorksheet 4999 are relevant to thequestion of whether a particularconfiguration is a rifle within themeaning of the relevant statutes. Forinstance, back-up or flip-up sights thatcan only be effectively used when thefirearm is shouldered are an indicatorthat a firearm is designed, made, andintended to be fired from the shoulder.Similarly, the presence of a reflex sightwith flip-to the side magnifier that haslimited eye relief (i.e., the sight isunusable unless aimed and fired fromthe shoulder) is a design incorporatedon firearms designed, made, andintended to be fired from the shoulder. The Department acknowledges thatWorksheet 4999 incorrectly consideredand assigned points for the lack of sightsto determine if a firearm is a rifledesigned, made, and intended to befired from the shoulder. As discussed,the Department notes that the correctinquiry for purposes of determiningwhether a firearm equipped with a**brace** is designed, made, andintended to be fired from the shoulderis to consider whether the sight or scopehas an eye relief that requiresshouldering in order to be used asdesigned. Therefore, the Departmentbelieves it is not necessary to provide alist of acceptable style optics that arecompatible with one-handed fire, asrequested in the comments.

They've gone full retard.

[Ilikebuckets]

So I am at a LGS today, and we start discussing the ATF brace rule. He said that if you read through the rule, there's also mention of optics and sights designed for a rifle that could qualify your pistol as a SBR. I said I just always use the Magpul MBUS flip up deals and he said yeah you'll not be in compliance with this rule if you leave them on past the 120 day grace period. Then he tells me that the rule states any optic or sights that are designed for a rifle with a fixed eye relief would make it an SBR just like a brace would. He said they consider the typical AR "peephole and post" to be in that category. Then he said a red dot sight is okay because it's not magnified so it's eye relief isn't limited.

Is that correct? This ATF over reach is already over the top, but are they seriously saying I can't have flip up sights on my 10.5" AR pistol? What about 3-dot pistol sights? I never saw a set for an AR pistol, but if this guy was correct and these lawsuits fail, then is a red dot my only option? Someone please get my blood pressure down and tell me this guy was wrong...

(EDIT)
From the near-100 page over reach (Page 6543 of the Federal Register) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...2023-01001.pdf
Therefore, some of the sights listed onWorksheet 4999 are relevant to thequestion of whether a particularconfiguration is a rifle within themeaning of the relevant statutes. Forinstance, back-up or flip-up sights thatcan only be effectively used when thefirearm is shouldered are an indicatorthat a firearm is designed, made, andintended to be fired from the shoulder.Similarly, the presence of a reflex sightwith flip-to the side magnifier that haslimited eye relief (i.e., the sight isunusable unless aimed and fired fromthe shoulder) is a design incorporatedon firearms designed, made, andintended to be fired from the shoulder. The Department acknowledges thatWorksheet 4999 incorrectly consideredand assigned points for the lack of sightsto determine if a firearm is a rifledesigned, made, and intended to befired from the shoulder. As discussed,the Department notes that the correctinquiry for purposes of determiningwhether a firearm equipped with a**brace** is designed, made, andintended to be fired from the shoulderis to consider whether the sight or scopehas an eye relief that requiresshouldering in order to be used asdesigned. Therefore, the Departmentbelieves it is not necessary to provide alist of acceptable style optics that arecompatible with one-handed fire, asrequested in the comments.

They've gone full retard.

I*m not looking it up, but in the lead up to the ruling I think I remember reading that their thought was that certain types of sights are meant to be used on a firearm that is shouldered. Since pistols aren*t meant to be shouldered you should not need certain sights and having one of those sights on your firearms shows that you mean to shoulder it.


Might be time to invest in a company that produces blood pressure pills.

[HanzMcFeely]

Buis/flip ups can be used on a pistol if you flip to the large aperature on the rear sight…maybe not accurately but possible…just sayin’

As for how the ATF considers that? Cant comment.

This whole thing is a clusterfluff and im of the mindset of do what you want and see fit in response to their bullshit.

[Emptymag]

It's bullshit because you can use iron sights just fine by using your cheek against the buffer tube.

Maybe they will make shooting like THAT illegal too - then change their minds and say it's ok to do it on Sundays, then ban the use of triggers in order to be consistent.