Pistol Braced Firearm same as SBR? Or its own new NFA Category?

[Bret]

Every AR I own was built on a lower transferred as "other". That is the only thing either I or the ATF could prove or disprove.

Yep. I was mainly thinking about people buying pistols after the date of publication. That would be easy for the ATF to prove if they chose to dive in that far. Do be prepared to send a picture of the whole gun if they request it.

[yoni]

Every single person that files the "free" form, is stabbing the rest of us in the back and the Constitution. You are willing to sell your freedom cheap. The government will take all these files to court to fight the law suits.

[Bret]

You’re right. I should stick it to them by paying $200 dollars for the same thing. That will show them.

[gaijin]

You’re right. I should stick it to them by paying $200 dollars for the same thing. That will show them.

By all means, do what you believe is best for you.
Do however, remember this exchange down the road.

[Bret]

Every single person that files the "free" form, is stabbing the rest of us in the back and the Constitution.

If you feel that way about the NFA items in general, ok. However, getting a no cost stamp versus one for $200 when the gun was going to be made into an SBR eventually anyway has no impact on the Constitutionality of the law or regulations. That said, if you disagree and feel that strongly about it, I'm willing to accept your $200 and file a regular Form 1.

You are willing to sell your freedom cheap.

So paying $0 is selling my freedom for cheap but paying $200 is standing up for it? A third option would be to keep it braced if the new regulations are upheld, but then I'd end up with a gun that's not configured as I want and risk losing everything for it. The fourth and final option would be to remove the brace all together. However, again I'd end up with a gun that's not configured as I want and Biden/ATF will have won because I wouldn't have an SBR.

The government will take all these files to court to fight the law suits.

Compliance with laws and regulations has zero impact on if they're ruled Constitutional or not. If that were the case, laws and regulations would never be overturned. Non-compliance can motivate politicians, but there are not enough potential votes in the house and senate to override a Biden veto.

By all means, do what you believe is best for you.
Do however, remember this exchange down the road.

It's not just that it's best for me, not paying $200 to SBR a gun doesn't hurt other gun owners. Furthermore, it deprives the federal government of revenue which is always a good thing.

[yoni]

I say do nothing at this point in time.

I am fairly sure we will win on the brace issue, and in at least one of the law suits is also asking to declare that SBR being in the NFA is not Constitutional. I think we have a 60-40 chance of winning that as well.

[Sidneyious]

I say do nothing at this point in time.

I am fairly sure we will win on the brace issue, and in at least one of the law suits is also asking to declare that SBR being in the NFA is not Constitutional. I think we have a 60-40 chance of winning that as well.

I have been seeing more and more of these as time goes on about this.
Im doing nothing and when I do have to do something well I got a couple pvc containers I can seal and I got a shovel.

[bobcatdriver]

If you feel that way about the NFA items in general, ok. However, getting a no cost stamp versus one for $200 when the gun was going to be made into an SBR eventually anyway has no impact on the Constitutionality of the law or regulations. That said, if you disagree and feel that strongly about it, I'm willing to accept your $200 and file a regular Form 1.


So paying $0 is selling my freedom for cheap but paying $200 is standing up for it? A third option would be to keep it braced if the new regulations are upheld, but then I'd end up with a gun that's not configured as I want and risk losing everything for it. The fourth and final option would be to remove the brace all together. However, again I'd end up with a gun that's not configured as I want and Biden/ATF will have won because I wouldn't have an SBR.


Compliance with laws and regulations has zero impact on if they're ruled Constitutional or not. If that were the case, laws and regulations would never be overturned. Non-compliance can motivate politicians, but there are not enough potential votes in the house and senate to override a Biden veto.


It's not just that it's best for me, not paying $200 to SBR a gun doesn't hurt other gun owners. Furthermore, it deprives the federal government of revenue which is always a good thing.

Damn! This was the most sensible reply in this thread. Thank you.

[DwayneZ]

I say do nothing at this point in time.

I am fairly sure we will win on the brace issue, and in at least one of the law suits is also asking to declare that SBR being in the NFA is not Constitutional. I think we have a 60-40 chance of winning that as well.

Will win, but not within 120 days. That's the ATF goal, to F as many people as they can within the 120 days, and then after that F as many as they can between day 120 and the day the courts rule ATF did illegal activity.

For the ATF, their job at F'n you was successful.

[yoni]

At 119 days if we haven't won, I will make my guns legal.

Then I will wait and see.

When we win I will set them back to normal. If we win like I think we might, then one AR will go from SB tactical to a regular stock as I think we have a good chance for SBR under NFA to be thrown out