ATF Coming After Firearms with Stabilizing Braces

[Occam]

Cool! Makes sense but I half way thought that someone said elsewhere that buying it as a pistol and then adding a folding stock somehow makes it a no go. Makes no sense. How reliable has it been?

Runs great. I don't think I've ever had a failure to feed, fire, or extract. I did whack a finger on my support hand once while ungracefully slapping the charging handle down. That big heavy sliding bolt and spring thump forward with authority. I have a telescoping/collapsible brace on this Micro. That Star Wars looking optic is a Vortex Razor AMG UH-1 that's super quick on target acquisition. Magpul 35-round mag. You can't even see any of the blood stains from that one finger injury! Wipes right off. Also, when I woke up the day after getting it, I could speak Czech well enough to order beer.

 

[outrider58]

No thank you . I do not want a red balloon for braces. No thank you.

 

[smdub]

buying it as a pistol and then adding a folding stock somehow makes it a no go.

Adding a STOCK to a pistol makes it a SBR.
Adding a BRACE to a pistol and it is still a pistol.

 

[Inigoes]

I’m wondering this too. Can I buy a CZ Scorpion (as a pistol) and add a folding stock or is that considered an SBR?

If you add a folding stock, then it's a SBR. Subject to the NFA and MD's 29" overall length.

If you add a pistol brace, then it still a pistol. It's still a pistol...

 

[kmittleman]

If you add a folding stock, then it's a SBR. Subject to the NFA and MD's 29" overall length.

If you add a pistol brace, then it still a pistol. It's still a pistol...

Yeah I just saw that online. They all look the same - gonna have to pass on this.

 

[rgramjet]

If you add a folding stock, then it's a SBR. Subject to the NFA and MD's 29" overall length.

If you add a pistol brace, then it still a pistol.

I was asking about a folding pistol brace.

 

[smdub]

I was asking about a folding pistol brace.

Folding makes no difference to a pistol.
A folding stock (on an SBR) counts as one of the 'MD evil features'. By itself its fine but you can't also have a flash hider on it.

 

[outrider58]

If you add a folding stock, then it's a SBR. Subject to the NFA and MD's 29" overall length.

If you add a pistol brace, then it still a pistol. It's still a pistol...

I was asking about a folding pistol brace.

Folding makes no difference to a pistol.
A folding stock (on an SBR) counts as one of the 'MD evil features'. By itself its fine but you can't also have a flash hider on it.

A couple points:
If you are talking about a folding 'stock', ie a folding buffer tube, you can put them on any and all AR15s that rely on that buffer tube to enable it to fire semi-automatically. The LAW type folder comes to mind. It will NOT count as an evil feature.

In any event, a folding stock that allows the gun to be fired in semi-auto mode WILL count as an evil feature.

Also, as far as a folding brace is concerned, it is NOT a stock, and in theory, not supposed to be shouldered. Who knows where that one will end up, but for now, we are back to legally using braces on our pistols(some of us never stopped).

 

[slsc98]

Not sure if this has been posted yet; looks as if this specific decision is as recent as last week …


Federal Judge Rules Millions of NRA Members Exempt From ATF Pistol Brace Rule
It came after the group filed a lawsuit against the ATF rule, which classifies pistols with the brace as short-barreled rifles.

A federal judge has blocked the ATF from enforcing its pistol brace rule for millions of members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) as the appeals process plays out.

It came after the NRA filed a lawsuit against the ATF, or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, arguing that the agency’s rule to reclassify the brace-equipped pistols as short-barreled rifles is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay sided with the gun rights group, arguing that the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals already concluded that the ATF pistol-brace rule “fails the logical outgrowth test and violates” the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and is “unlawful” under the act.

“The court, therefore, sees no reason why it should not consider this argument and APA claim in ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion,” the judge added. “To not do so would be exalt form over substance, particularly since the Fifth Circuit has already determined that this claim has a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits.”

The judge agreed with the NRA’s arguments that its members would be substantially harmed by the ATF rule, which was finalized in January 2023.

“Compliance with the Final Rule is not discretionary, and the NRA’s members face severe penalties for their failure to comply with the Final Rule,” Judge Lindsay wrote in the ruling last week. “Accordingly, both of the final requirements for injunctive relief are satisfied because the threatened injury to the NRA’s members outweighs the threatened harm to the Defendants, and enforcement of the Final Rule under the circumstances will not disserve the public interest.”


Nothing in this link that isn’t above (in case a paywall encountered): https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/federal-judge-rules-millions-of-nra-members-exempt-from-atf-pistol-brace-rule-5620182?utm_source=RTNews&src_src=RTNews&utm_campaign=rtbreaking-2024-04-02-2&src_cmp=rtbreaking-2024-04-02-2&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAc/Yiex4I6cbF7boC8GZWBr5+plGQ1A2tjJZ+jm9RJCU=

 

[Bob A]

Not sure if this has been posted yet; looks as if this specific decision is as recent as last week …


Federal Judge Rules Millions of NRA Members Exempt From ATF Pistol Brace Rule
It came after the group filed a lawsuit against the ATF rule, which classifies pistols with the brace as short-barreled rifles.

A federal judge has blocked the ATF from enforcing its pistol brace rule for millions of members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) as the appeals process plays out.

It came after the NRA filed a lawsuit against the ATF, or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, arguing that the agency’s rule to reclassify the brace-equipped pistols as short-barreled rifles is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay sided with the gun rights group, arguing that the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals already concluded that the ATF pistol-brace rule “fails the logical outgrowth test and violates” the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and is “unlawful” under the act.

“The court, therefore, sees no reason why it should not consider this argument and APA claim in ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion,” the judge added. “To not do so would be exalt form over substance, particularly since the Fifth Circuit has already determined that this claim has a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits.”

The judge agreed with the NRA’s arguments that its members would be substantially harmed by the ATF rule, which was finalized in January 2023.

“Compliance with the Final Rule is not discretionary, and the NRA’s members face severe penalties for their failure to comply with the Final Rule,” Judge Lindsay wrote in the ruling last week. “Accordingly, both of the final requirements for injunctive relief are satisfied because the threatened injury to the NRA’s members outweighs the threatened harm to the Defendants, and enforcement of the Final Rule under the circumstances will not disserve the public interest.”


Nothing in this link that isn’t above (in case a paywall encountered): https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/federal-judge-rules-millions-of-nra-members-exempt-from-atf-pistol-brace-rule-5620182?utm_source=RTNews&src_src=RTNews&utm_campaign=rtbreaking-2024-04-02-2&src_cmp=rtbreaking-2024-04-02-2&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAc/Yiex4I6cbF7boC8GZWBr5+plGQ1A2tjJZ+jm9RJCU=

So this seems to piggyback on the decision won by SAF, FPC and GOA to allow their members to utilise pistol braces without requiring SBR approval from ATF. Different judge, so NRA must have wanted to get its members covered as well.

 

[Coehorn]

So this piggybacks on the decision won by SAF, FPC and GOA to allow their members to utilise pistol braces without requiring SBR approval from ATF. Different judge, so NRA must have wanted to get its members covered as well.

I remember something from 6 or 8 months back about SAF, FPC and GOA.

The NRA stuff sounds newish.

 

[outrider58]

So this piggybacks on the decision won by SAF, FPC and GOA to allow their members to utilise pistol braces without requiring SBR approval from ATF. Different judge, so NRA must have wanted to get its members covered as well.

I remember something from 6 or 8 months back about SAF, FPC and GOA.

The NRA stuff sounds newish.

Me, I'm riding the Maxim Defense wave. All the same though. There is safety in numbers, said no Christian in the Colosseum.

 

[smokey]

I remember something from 6 or 8 months back about SAF, FPC and GOA.

The NRA stuff sounds newish.

Basically the goa, saf, and fpc put in all the hard work to get members covered, then the NRA piggy-backed to try to seem relevant.

 

[Coehorn]

Basically the goa, saf, and fpc put in all the hard work to get members covered, then the NRA piggy-backed to try to seem relevant.

Hey, Smokey.

I'm terrible at wading through pages of legalese. My eyes glaze over.

If you or others don't mind: In a nutshell, what are these individual groups hoping to achieve? A complete reversal of the ATF ruling? Are these individual groups the only people in the country getting to keep/use their pistol braces? Is there a higher court ruling on the horizon for all of America?

Thank you.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

Hey, Smokey.

I'm terrible at wading through pages of legalese. My eyes glaze over.

If you or others don't mind: In a nutshell, what are these individual groups hoping to achieve? A complete reversal of the ATF ruling? Are these individual groups the only people in the country getting to keep/use their pistol braces? Is there a higher court ruling on the horizon for all of America?

Thank you.

Chevron being smacked down.

 

[Worsley]

Not sure if this has been posted yet; looks as if this specific decision is as recent as last week …


Federal Judge Rules Millions of NRA Members Exempt From ATF Pistol Brace Rule
It came after the group filed a lawsuit against the ATF rule, which classifies pistols with the brace as short-barreled rifles.

A federal judge has blocked the ATF from enforcing its pistol brace rule for millions of members of the National Rifle Association (NRA) as the appeals process plays out.

It came after the NRA filed a lawsuit against the ATF, or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, arguing that the agency’s rule to reclassify the brace-equipped pistols as short-barreled rifles is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay sided with the gun rights group, arguing that the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals already concluded that the ATF pistol-brace rule “fails the logical outgrowth test and violates” the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and is “unlawful” under the act.

“The court, therefore, sees no reason why it should not consider this argument and APA claim in ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion,” the judge added. “To not do so would be exalt form over substance, particularly since the Fifth Circuit has already determined that this claim has a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits.”

The judge agreed with the NRA’s arguments that its members would be substantially harmed by the ATF rule, which was finalized in January 2023.

“Compliance with the Final Rule is not discretionary, and the NRA’s members face severe penalties for their failure to comply with the Final Rule,” Judge Lindsay wrote in the ruling last week. “Accordingly, both of the final requirements for injunctive relief are satisfied because the threatened injury to the NRA’s members outweighs the threatened harm to the Defendants, and enforcement of the Final Rule under the circumstances will not disserve the public interest.”


Nothing in this link that isn’t above (in case a paywall encountered): https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/federal-judge-rules-millions-of-nra-members-exempt-from-atf-pistol-brace-rule-5620182?utm_source=RTNews&src_src=RTNews&utm_campaign=rtbreaking-2024-04-02-2&src_cmp=rtbreaking-2024-04-02-2&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAc/Yiex4I6cbF7boC8GZWBr5+plGQ1A2tjJZ+jm9RJCU=

I thought a nation wide injunction was already in place.

 

[Combloc]

We're still beating this dead horse, huh?

 

[John from MD]

I thought a nation wide injunction was already in place.

AFAICR, it was for members of the group who filed the first appeal. That was the Firearms Policy Coalition which many of us joined to have the protection allowed by the Court.

 

[Worsley]

AFAICR, it was for members of the group who filed the first appeal. That was the Firearms Policy Coalition which many of us joined to have the protection allowed by the Court.

I knew that but later on there was another ruling and this one blocked the ATF for enforcing the rule nationwide.

Judge Blocks ATF From Enforcing Biden's Pistol Brace Rule Nationwide - Firearms News

Judge Blocks ATF From Enforcing Biden's Pistol Brace Rule Nationwide

www.firearmsnews.com

 

[BurkeM]

Hey, Smokey.

I'm terrible at wading through pages of legalese. My eyes glaze over.

If you or others don't mind: In a nutshell, what are these individual groups hoping to achieve? A complete reversal of the ATF ruling?

Yes

Are these individual groups the only people in the country getting to keep/use their pistol braces?

Yes.

Is there a higher court ruling on the horizon for all of America?

Eventually.