Stop squirten muh lawn!
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
How many a-holes will be dumping braces and braced guns on here over the next week?
- Thread starter spencer60
- Start date
I had an email from one distributor advising dealers not to return braced pistols as overstock or they would be refused and returned to sender as it is not legal right now for them to accept them. Seeing plenty for sale on here though.
Only for 120 days from the listing in the FR. After that $200 no matter what.
So has anyone noticed what the market for braced pistols has been since the announcement on Friday? Prices up? Prices down? From what I see on the ODT and GB handgun listings there doesn't seem to be much change. If anything maybe only fewer listings. Thoughts?
I've got a lot of emails claiming "On Sale Now" but the prices have been meh.
The new ATF rule for braces has not been entered in the Federal register as of this morning. Do what you want for the moment.
So much bad info is being stated and restated. There are very specific words that allow AR pistols to remain in place but the focus of the 293 page document is that the previously allowed "pistol" braces will no longer be allowed, once the "ruling" is officially published. For now, as of this day/hour/minute, nothing has changed. AR pistols are still legal, without registering as SBRs, CZ Scorpions are still legal, similar other previous "pistols" remain pistols, as long as the "braces" and "attachment" mechanisms are acceptable and do not fall within the new amended definition of "rifle".
I posted this on another forum to discuss a means to keep our originally designed pistols, without braces, as pistols that do not require ATF notification/registration...
In the Jan. 13th info, a standard "6- to 6 -1/2-inch" buffer tube seems to be okay, as per the discussion below that first appears on page 162:
Regarding the "optics" question, they are providing a similar way to actually use optics on a pistol, although the wording is specifically written to be confusing.
In the page 10 factoring criteria, one of the "other factors" is "(3) whether the weapon is equipped with sights or a scope with eye relief that require the weapon to be fired from the shoulder in order to be used as designed." By adding a red dot or holographic sight, for example, with unlimited eye relief, this statement says it is okay, as the unlimited eye relief does NOT require that the firearm be shouldered to use the sights/scope. The use of sights may be questionable but, as with other pistols with iron sights, you do not have to shoulder the firearm to effectively use them.
So, with the extended buffer tube or brace adapter removed, along with the unlimited eye relief wording, in my opinion, I can keep my Scorpions and MPX models, and similarly designed models (including AR pistols with pistol length buffer tubes), as pistols without requiring an ATF submittal and approval, right?
Note, also, that the "factoring criteria" is part of the newly amended definition of the word "rifle". This factoring criteria is a list of items that uses the word "AND", which is meaningful in that such a list requires ALL of the factoring criteria to be met in order to "qualify" the item as a rifle.
In my opinion, I see some wiggle room to keep AR pistols in place if they cannot be shouldered, while making braces a thing of the past - unless your disability actually necessitates their use, then you should be good to use them as designed.
Not legal advice. Just my two cents worth!!
I posted this on another forum to discuss a means to keep our originally designed pistols, without braces, as pistols that do not require ATF notification/registration...
In the Jan. 13th info, a standard "6- to 6 -1/2-inch" buffer tube seems to be okay, as per the discussion below that first appears on page 162:
In the paragraph above, they are providing a somewhat confusing explanation as to when a standard 6- to 6-1/2-inch pistol buffer tube does NOT meet the standard rifle criteria. They further explain that an attachment at the rear that does not support the "cycle of operation", such as with an adapter on the CZ Scorpion or Sig MPX, is obviously there for something other than supporting the "cycle of operation" such as for shouldering the firearm.
Regarding the "optics" question, they are providing a similar way to actually use optics on a pistol, although the wording is specifically written to be confusing.
In the page 10 factoring criteria, one of the "other factors" is "(3) whether the weapon is equipped with sights or a scope with eye relief that require the weapon to be fired from the shoulder in order to be used as designed." By adding a red dot or holographic sight, for example, with unlimited eye relief, this statement says it is okay, as the unlimited eye relief does NOT require that the firearm be shouldered to use the sights/scope. The use of sights may be questionable but, as with other pistols with iron sights, you do not have to shoulder the firearm to effectively use them.
So, with the extended buffer tube or brace adapter removed, along with the unlimited eye relief wording, in my opinion, I can keep my Scorpions and MPX models, and similarly designed models (including AR pistols with pistol length buffer tubes), as pistols without requiring an ATF submittal and approval, right?
Note, also, that the "factoring criteria" is part of the newly amended definition of the word "rifle". This factoring criteria is a list of items that uses the word "AND", which is meaningful in that such a list requires ALL of the factoring criteria to be met in order to "qualify" the item as a rifle.
In my opinion, I see some wiggle room to keep AR pistols in place if they cannot be shouldered, while making braces a thing of the past - unless your disability actually necessitates their use, then you should be good to use them as designed.
Not legal advice. Just my two cents worth!!
I think you are probably right. This rule simply takes us back to pre-brace days where an AR pistol was OK with a tube that didn't have the typical provisions to mount a stock.
Things like the Scorpion without a tube could be used with a sling to stabilize them.
As was pointed out though, all that was based on a series of opinion letters. Just like this rule, the ATF is purposely being vague so they can basically do whatever they want.
Hopefully that's one of the things that will get this rule nullified in court.
Things like the Scorpion without a tube could be used with a sling to stabilize them.
As was pointed out though, all that was based on a series of opinion letters. Just like this rule, the ATF is purposely being vague so they can basically do whatever they want.
Hopefully that's one of the things that will get this rule nullified in court.
I don't care
