Cutting down sba3 brace questions

[prepare]

Modifying the brace kind of defeats the purpose.

[tucsondirt]

Why would the ATF care if you modify a brace?
It’s already a pistol, who care if it’s shorter? If you put a brace on a Ruger charger then take it off, you haven’t done anything wrong.Someone please explain why this would interest the ATF?

[Arik]

Why would the ATF care if you modify a brace?
It’s already a pistol, who care if it’s shorter? If you put a brace on a Ruger charger then take it off, you haven’t done anything wrong.Someone please explain why this would interest the ATF?

From what I remember you weren't allowed to modify the part where your forearm goes. People were cutting the sides as well as putting in blocks of wood and styrofoam to fill in that space and make it easier to shoulder. In that case it would be hard to use as a brace.

[tucsondirt]

But if you just have a buffer tube, it’s hard to use as a brace too.
Does anyone have any proof the ATF has ever written an opinion on ,this or charged anyone?

[Arik]

No idea. I don't own one I just remember reading it way back when they made their 2nd, or 3rd, ruling on the brace.

My guess.....buffer tube needs to be there. Brace does not

[MegademiC]

But if you just have a buffer tube, it’s hard to use as a brace too.
Does anyone have any proof the ATF has ever written an opinion on ,this or charged anyone?

Dont try to apply logic to government enforcement of laws.

My suggestion would be to tuck the wings or get one of the cheek-only extensions (caa makes them iirc).

[Arik]

Here you go

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...ilizing-braces

".......But it then goes on to clarify that “an NFA firearm has not necessarily been made … even if the attached firearm happens to be fired from the shoulder.”

Rather, the ATF will employ “both objective and subjective analyses” to determine the legal significance of the attachment of a brace to a pistol and its subsequent use as a shoulder stock.

In particular:

If … the shooter/possessor takes affirmative steps to configure the devise for use as a shoulder stock— for example, configuring the brace so as to permanently affix it to the end of a buffer tube, (thereby creating a length that has no other purpose than to facilitate its use as a stock), removing the arm-strap, or otherwise undermining its ability to be used as a brace – and then in fact shoots the firearm from the shoulder using the accessory as a shoulder stock, that person has objectively ‘redesigned’ the firearm for purposes of the NFA.


Also, apparently there's been another ruling last year. I found it looking for the 2017 ruling. The 2019 rule states that adding a pistol grip to the handguards on a pistol less than 26in length constitutes a AOW. I'm paraphrasing but you can find the info I'd you look up ATF arm brace 2019

[RHINOWSO]

NFA and all those BATFE rules are fooking booolchit, but knowing how the "Brace" thing is tiptoeing near the line of what makes Johnny-Law-Dawg at the BATFE mad, I wouldn't screw with a brace by cutting, drilling, modifying, etc.

Or even if I would, I wouldn't tell a bunch of people on the interwebz about it.

Personally the only reason I braced pistols them is to keep them legally pistols and not a rifles; otherwise if I want a SBR, I make an SBR.

[RHINOWSO]

Why would the ATF care if you modify a brace?
It’s already a pistol, who care if it’s shorter?

Because they are government people who have to justify their jobs...?

There is lots of stuff they 'care' about that they really shouldn't.

[tucsondirt]

Here you go

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...ilizing-braces

".......But it then goes on to clarify that “an NFA firearm has not necessarily been made … even if the attached firearm happens to be fired from the shoulder.”

Rather, the ATF will employ “both objective and subjective analyses” to determine the legal significance of the attachment of a brace to a pistol and its subsequent use as a shoulder stock.

In particular:

If … the shooter/possessor takes affirmative steps to configure the devise for use as a shoulder stock— for example, configuring the brace so as to permanently affix it to the end of a buffer tube, (thereby creating a length that has no other purpose than to facilitate its use as a stock), removing the arm-strap, or otherwise undermining its ability to be used as a brace – and then in fact shoots the firearm from the shoulder using the accessory as a shoulder stock, that person has objectively ‘redesigned’ the firearm for purposes of the NFA.


Also, apparently there's been another ruling last year. I found it looking for the 2017 ruling. The 2019 rule states that adding a pistol grip to the handguards on a pistol less than 26in length constitutes a AOW. I'm paraphrasing but you can find the info I'd you look up ATF arm brace 2019

Thanks for that response. It sounds like it’s not a good idea to remove the arm band from a brace, or do anything that makes it MORE like a rifle stock. I can’t see how shortening a brace so it can be stowed more easily makes it more rifle-like.

I was aware you can’t add a VFG to a pistol fore end but the ATF’s tolerance for AFG’s just shows how wish-washy their logic is.