What's new

URGENT, Pending ATF determination changes Regarding "Arm Braces"

Status
Not open for further replies.

nortac

"Can't Raise an Eyebrow"
The problem is that NO ONE can really tell you if your arm brace is OK! It is worthwhile to read the above link in it's entirety if you have or anticipate having any arm brace on an AR "pistol". A brace that is OK on one gun may be considered not OK on another build. If an enforcement officer deems by his own discretion that the pistol can be shot one handed, then it may be OK. If however, the same officer decides that the "pistol" is too unwieldy due to other attachments or a scope whose eye relief would require the gun to be shot from the shoulder, then it is not OK and would fall under NFA rules. Very subjective and someone who in good faith builds/ modifies a gun by what he/she believes is legal can too easily be caught in a legal bind.
 

nikonNUT

The "Peter Hathaway Capstick" of small game
The problem is that NO ONE can really tell you if your arm brace is OK! It is worthwhile to read the above link in it's entirety if you have or anticipate having any arm brace on an AR "pistol". A brace that is OK on one gun may be considered not OK on another build. If an enforcement officer deems by his own discretion that the pistol can be shot one handed, then it may be OK. If however, the same officer decides that the "pistol" is too unwieldy due to other attachments or a scope whose eye relief would require the gun to be shot from the shoulder, then it is not OK and would fall under NFA rules. Very subjective and someone who in good faith builds/ modifies a gun by what he/she believes is legal can too easily be caught in a legal bind.
And one brace is OK (at the moment) but another is not... The SB3A is getting hammered in this deal. I'm just aggravate that we went from "It's fine as long as you don't shoulder the weapon.", to "It's fine to should the weapon." to BAD!!!! Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad! This making "law" at the field agent level is disturbing as FATD already ruled. I can't see this ending well...
 
And one brace is OK (at the moment) but another is not... The SB3A is getting hammered in this deal. I'm just aggravate that we went from "It's fine as long as you don't shoulder the weapon.", to "It's fine to should the weapon." to BAD!!!! Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad! This making "law" at the field agent level is disturbing as FATD already ruled. I can't see this ending well...

The ATF serves no real purpose


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

nortac

"Can't Raise an Eyebrow"
Yup, I selected the SBA3 specifically for my build last year because I thought is was one that had been judged GTG.
 

nikonNUT

The "Peter Hathaway Capstick" of small game

nikonNUT

The "Peter Hathaway Capstick" of small game
The ATF withdrew their proposal.

Brace away!
This is good news but make no mistake... This is a "For Now" kind of deal. We can breathe a sigh of relief but we can't give them an inch!

(Billing Code: 4410-FY-P)
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
Docket No. 2020R-10W
Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with “Stabilizing Braces”; Withdrawal of Guidance
AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice; withdrawal.
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) is announcing the withdrawal of a notice and request for comments entitled “Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with ‘Stabilizing Braces’,” that was published on December 18, 2020.
DATES: The withdrawal is effective [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
ADDRESSES: This Notice also will be made available on the ATF Web site (www.atf.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Lange, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Ave. NE, Mail Stop 6N-518, Washington DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070 (this is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1

Upon further consultation with the Department of Justice and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, ATF is withdrawing, pending further Department of Justice review, the notice and request for comments entitled “Objective Factors for Classifying Weapons with ‘Stabilizing Braces’,” that was published on December 18, 2020. 85 FR 82516. As explained in the notice, the proposed guidance was not a regulation. The notice informed and invited comment from the industry and public on a proposed guidance prior to issuing a final guidance document.
The withdrawal of the guidance does not change any law, regulation, or other legally binding requirement.
December 23, 2020
Marvin G. Richardson Associate Deputy Director

The part I put in bold is the troubling part... What is the next "proposed guidance"?
 
Last edited:
The cynic in me thinks they withdrew the notice because they intend to outlaw/confiscate all ARs of any description, or at least more onerous restrictions, licensing, tax stamps for everything, etc.

There’s that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Top Bottom