Gun Talk

[FourFans]

7 hours ago, brabus said:

But how would they know you have an “illegal” SBR (outside of you taking your pistol to a range and a LEO/ATF walks up and ask for your approved F1)? I fail to see any logic in how this ruling auto makes everyone with an AR pistol somehow on a “registry.”

Short answer: When this becomes law, SBR owners are required to register them.  The process requires ATF approval, if they deny your request (btw if background checks take longer than 88 days, they are automatically denied), they now know that you have an SBR, that was not approved, making you a violator of federal law.  In short, the ATF is trying to get owners to self incriminate before they know if they're approved to own the SBR that they already own.

A federal administration having a list of approved and disapproved SBRs is, by definition, a registry.

I doubt that's intentional, but it's an easy to see second order effect that shows they didn't think about this at all before implementing...soooooo....par for the course with this administration

Edited January 22, 2023 by FourFans130

[brabus]

@FourFans130 That’s not correct. You do not assemble an SBR until getting approval. The F1 simply provides info like serno on receiver and lengths. Submitting a F1 does not mean you currently possess an SBR, it means you intend to build one once you get approval. If someone is the unreasonably paranoid type, they can feel free to stash the lower at a friend’s house and keep the stock and upper at their house…an ATF raid on your house (which isn’t going to happen) would not produce an SBR. 

[HeloDude]

2 minutes ago, brabus said:

@FourFans130 That’s not correct. You do not assemble an SBR until getting approval.

According to the ATF, if you have a pistol with a brace you currently have an unregistered SBR.  This was all in the video I shared.

[brabus]

But who says I have a pistol with a brace? That’s the point. I don’t have one, I’m simply applying to build an SBR. That’s how the F1 process works. The NFA is bullshit, don’t get me wrong, but there’s so much misunderstanding about the process. It’s actually fairly easy and there’s no way for the gov to “trap” you, unless you’re a complete idiot and do something like submit a pic of a fully assembled SBR to the ATF on your app.

Edited January 22, 2023 by brabus

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, brabus said:

But who says I have a pistol with a brace? That’s the point. I don’t have one, I’m simply applying to build an SBR. That’s how the F1 process works. The NFA is bullshit, don’t get me wrong, but there’s so much misunderstanding about the process. It’s actually fairly easy and there’s no way for the gov to “trap” you, unless you’re a complete idiot and do something like submit a pic of a fully assembled SBR to the ATF on your app.

The video I posted, that you quickly dismissed, was discussing how if someone (you or anyone else) attempts to register their current pistol w/ brace under the ATF’s current plan, that person is telling the ATF they have an assembled pistol w/ brace, ie an unregistered SBR according to the ATF.

If you’re wanting to take advantage of registering a future SBR build, then go for it.  But that’s not what the video was discussing.

[FourFans]

4 hours ago, brabus said:

unless you’re a complete idiot and do something like submit a pic of a fully assembled SBR to the ATF on your app.

We have many complete idiots in our country.  We also have many not-complete idiots that actually trust government agencies not to lie to us or entrap us because they are naive, and often actively ignorant.  In aviation, these individuals are commonly referred to as navigators. 

Everything you said is correct and, assuming gun owners self-educate and apply a little common sense.  Those who choose NOT to be smart are the ones who will self incriminate, thereby ending up on a defacto gun registry and THEN start complaining about their rights.   

Lowest common denominator with shoot us all in the foot.

Edited January 22, 2023 by FourFans130

[brabus]

8 hours ago, HeloDude said:

that person is telling the ATF they have an assembled pistol w/ brace

But one is not saying that. There isn’t a box on the F1 that says “check here if you already have a fully assembled AR pistol” or “this special edition form 1 is to register an already assembled AR with stabilizer brace.” There is not a single thing anywhere in the process, at all, that states the receiver on the F1 application is part of a fully assembled rifle meeting SBR definition.  That’s why this video and entire line of thinking is illogical fearmongering.

@FourFans130 I agree, and if someone gets in hot water because they send a pic of their assembled AR pistol attached to their F1, well that’s them suffering the consequences of their stupidity. But to be honest, even if someone does that, there’s probably still a 99% chance nothing comes of it. The ATF is one of the most incompetent agencies, and that’s saying a lot.

Edited January 23, 2023 by brabus

[HeloDude]

11 minutes ago, brabus said:

But one is not saying that. There isn’t a box on the F1 that says “check here if you already have a fully assembled AR pistol” or “this special edition form 1 is to register an already assembled AR with stabilizer brace.” There is not a single thing anywhere in the process, at all, that states the receiver on the F1 application is part of a fully assembled rifle meeting SBR definition.  That’s why this video and entire line of thinking is illogical fearmongering.

Dude, I love you, but I’m more likely to believe an attorney with GOA than you on this one.  Also, this is from the firearmblog:

The Department has determined that, as a matter of its own enforcement discretion, it will not, as the NPRM suggested as an option, require individuals and FFLs without an SOT that timely register their affected weapons with a “stabilizing brace,” which are in their possession as of the date this rule is published, to pay the $200 making tax usually due upon submission of such an application to register.

The whole point is that you’re going to be telling the ATF you are already in possession of the “SBR” (ie pistol w/brace) to get the free stamp/registration.  I think the problem is you’re going off of your prior knowledge before this new ruling/regulation…don’t you think one or more items in this process might be changing given the massive new change in the rule?

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2023/01/13/firearms-stabilizing-braces/

[filthy_liar]

Don't forget about the sight placement part of this ATF "ruling."  It includes verbiage that if the sight requires positioning the pistol to be braced by the shoulder to obtain a correct sight picture, the pistol is considered an sbr.  I paraphrased the hell out of that, but its in there.

Back to handguns...I'm addicted to Canik.  Turkish made glock-like striker fired handgun.  Started out with a TP9 SFX.  Kind of a race gun setup, long barrel and heavy.  Liked it so much I got a TP9 Elite SC for the nightstand.  Nice sub, slightly larger than a 43X.  Shoots great, need to upgrade to tritium night sights.  No plan for a red dot for now, I'm kind've moving away from red dots.  Unfortunately the Glock 20 moved from the nightstand down into the Saddam spider hole.  Too heavy and not as easy to shoot as the TP9 Elite.

[Smokin]

I think that you guys are talking past each other.  HeloDude is correctly saying that if you currently have a fully assembled AR pistol that was legal a week ago, it is now technically illegal even though the ATF is giving a grace period to register it.  Pretty much everyone else is saying more or less that either it is not realistic for the ATF to know that you have one or if you simply remove the upper, you no longer have an illegal pistol, so then you can request to "build" an SBR out of the parts you legally own.

The easiest solution is to put a full sized upper on the lower that was born as a pistol and it'll now identify as a rifle and be completely legal.  We really have 3 options:

1.  ignore the ruling and potentially become owners of illegal firearm(s) if the courts don't fix it

2. remove the upper, then turn in a form 1 to legally own an SBR, reassemble once stamp is received

3. put a rifle upper on it (16" barrel min for a min 26" overall length) and pretend this whole pistol thing never happened

Clearly option 3 puts you on the ATF's radar the least, but is also the least fun.  Option 1 is somewhat risky, although I guarantee that many gun owners will knowingly or unknowingly go that route.  Option 2 lets the ATF legally have a record of you, although I think we all know they already do.

[brabus]

What Smokin said. This is a nothing burger if you go option 2 (or 3, but why would you do that!) This also is along the lines of people saying for years, “but since you put measurements on your F1, then obviously that means you had to assemble the SBR to get those, ergo the ATF now knows you have an illegal SBR. You’re fucked!” Except that’s never happened to anyone in the history of F1s. I will bet anything that not a single person gets fucked by this who doesn’t go the option 1 route. 

Edited January 23, 2023 by brabus

[ClearedHot]

[uhhello]

Dude should have pulled the trigger a couple hundred times in that encounter.  

 

[filthy_liar]

These are kinda neat.  Glock in the MCK = felon, go to prison.  Glock sitting right beside the MCK = good to go.  Someone told me it takes under 3 seconds to put the glock into the MCK.  No idea if that is true.

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, filthy_liar said:

These are kinda neat.  Glock in the MCK = felon, go to prison.  Glock sitting right beside the MCK = good to go.  Someone told me it takes under 3 seconds to put the glock into the MCK.  No idea if that is true.

The way the ATF interprets the laws (and their own interpretations), the mere act of having such a device is enough to prosecute.  
 

[filthy_liar]

as it stands right now, the mck is completely legal to own, as is a brace.  For an AR pistol or any other pistol, the brace has to be taken off.  But it can be laying right next to the gun.  So this kit can be laying right next to a glock or sig, cannick, or whatever you want to put in it and its totally legal.  The crazy part is, is if you put the glock into the frame, it is now an sbr and the glock has to be registered as an sbr.  Not the frame, the glock 17 or whatever you are putting into the frame.  So now a glock 17 is an sbr.

[filthy_liar]

Understand your point about "enough to prosecute."  That is scary and is not helping the healthy distrust of the ATF.

[HeloDude]

59 minutes ago, filthy_liar said:

Understand your point about "enough to prosecute."  That is scary and is not helping the healthy distrust of the ATF.

It’s pretty simple—if you like and/or want more gun control laws then you most likely want and trust the ATF.  And vice versa.  The ATF isn’t needed anymore than the DEA, or plenty of the other bureaucratic 3 letter organizations.

[filthy_liar]

One thousand percent.  

[filthy_liar]

In case that wasn't clear - 1000 percent agree.

[ATIS]

Gun porn. 
 

My babies have been in my buddies (F-111 WSO) safe for over 10+ years since I moved to Cap Hill. Finally got a chance to get down there and inspect/clean what was needed. Other than running a patch through a shotgun and my S&W M19 2.5” .357…..the rest of the family was as pretty as the day they went in there. Lesson:  clean/oil before storage is you friend. 
Need to get out to the Quantico range if they will let us. 
Nothing like the feel of an M1 Garand or a Browning High Grade Ultra O/U, along with bro talk over morning coffee. 
 

Cheers

ATIS
 

[brabus]

@ATIS So when are you moving back to America where the 2A applies?

[HeloDude]

4 hours ago, ATIS said:

My babies have been in my buddies (F-111 WSO) safe for over 10+ years since I moved to Cap Hill.

They look pretty good considering he’s been shooting them every couple of months over the last 10+ years!

[ATIS]

6 hours ago, brabus said:

@ATIS So when are you moving back to America where the 2A applies?

😞

I deserve that 

[filthy_liar]

Jesus ATIS those are beautiful