RotoMetals2MidSouth Shooters SupplyRepackboxReloading Everything
Lee PrecisionWidenersInline FabricationTitan Reloading
Load Data
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 62

Thread: AR Pistol Brace = SBR with new ATF rules :(

  1. #1
    Banner Sponsor

    lar45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    2,823

    AR Pistol Brace = SBR with new ATF rules :(

    Looks like as of Friday January 13th the new ATF ruling goes into effect on Pistol Braces.
    https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...ilizing-braces

    Any rearward attachment not needed for the function of the pistol with any surface area that could be used to shoulder the weapon now turns it into a short barreled rifle, SBR.
    They are supposed to give us 120 days to register, modify, turn in or destroy...
    I bought a 16" barrel about a year ago for mine, just in case, Looks like I'll be installing it soon. I just hope the 16" barrel shoots as good as the 10".

  2. #2
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    121
    Just waiting for that inevitable Justice Thomas peepee smack... I just hope it doesn't take 2+ years

  3. #3
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,305
    Not all pistols with a brace fall under the new SBR regulations. There is a worksheet (form 4999) that is used to determine if the firearm is an SBR. Pay particular attention to the fine print at the bottom of section I.

    ATF is supposedly not charging the $200 tax if the firearm is submitted for SBR status in the next 120 days.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  4. #4
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,863
    The rule is effective when published in the Federal Register, most expect that tomorrow.

    I’m in no rush to do anything, lets see how it plays for a couple months.

  5. #5
    Banner Sponsor

    lar45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    2,823
    Hi Larry, I heard that form 4999 is not being used at all with the new ruling. I have not read the entire thing yet though.

  6. #6
    Boolit Master
    jdgabbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,422
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Gibson View Post
    Not all pistols with a brace fall under the new SBR regulations. There is a worksheet (form 4999) that is used to determine if the firearm is an SBR. Pay particular attention to the fine print at the bottom of section I.

    ATF is supposedly not charging the $200 tax if the firearm is submitted for SBR status in the next 120 days.
    Larry, you need to read the new 290 page rule. The 4999 is now out. Its completely gray with no black and white except for they're basically telling you anything they THINK could be used to shoulder a weapon is now considered a redesign.
    JDGabbard's Feedback Thread

    "A hand on a gun is better than a cop on the phone," Jerry Ellis, Oklahoma State House of Representatives.

    The neighbors refer to me affectionately as, "The nut up on the ridge with the cannon." - MaxHeadSpace.

    Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!

  7. #7
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    359
    I need some help here, haven't SBRs (short barreled rifles) been an NFA item since '34? I don't understand how a brace that is used to shoulder the firearm with a barrel less then 16" can be anything but (a SBR).

    Just because it is called a 'brace', not a 'stock', is supposed to make it legal?

    I've seen all the conflict this ruling has caused, maybe the AFT waited too long on the ruling?

    But if someone had tried to sell me one of these 'braces', I would have just laughed and said no-way....

    45_Colt

  8. #8
    Boolit Master
    jdgabbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,422
    Quote Originally Posted by 45_Colt View Post
    I need some help here, haven't SBRs (short barreled rifles) been an NFA item since '34? I don't understand how a brace that is used to shoulder the firearm with a barrel less then 16" can be anything but (a SBR).

    Just because it is called a 'brace', not a 'stock', is supposed to make it legal?

    I've seen all the conflict this ruling has caused, maybe the AFT waited too long on the ruling?

    But if someone had tried to sell me one of these 'braces', I would have just laughed and said no-way....

    45_Colt
    Well, they were originally designed for handicapped shooters to be able to better support AR style pistols. The ATF reviewed them, and determined they were not SBRs. Then a few people got wise to it and started shouldering them. Then they started asking the ATF if shouldering them constituted a redesign. The ATF said no, but later said it did, but then flipped again when it was pointed out to them that the way you use an item does not constitute a redesign under US law. So...then to settle the issue they basically started crafting a way to just make them all illegal. However, that kind of backfired on them when it was discovered that they had waited until between 10-40 million braced firearms were in circulation. So now, they're trying to clean it up in the most politically correct way possible.

    Funny story, this isn't the first time this has happened. The GCA created a provision for the SBR, shortening the required barrel length from 18 to 16 inches. And really, the SBRs, SBSs, and AOWs are all carry overs from when the NFA was intending to ban all Pistols. They yanked that part out last minute, but didn't think to pull the rest of them which were included to prevent work arounds for the pistol ban from becoming legal. The reality is that neither SBRs or SBSs should be in the NFA to begin with if you consider what the purpose of having them in there to begin with was. Moreover, both should have been removed as of 1942 when the M1 Carbine entered service, it was considered an SBR by definition of the NFA. Since, as US v Miller states, it was then in common usage within the military. According to the Miller Decision they should have been removed once the M1 Carbine was adopted. However, that never happened....
    JDGabbard's Feedback Thread

    "A hand on a gun is better than a cop on the phone," Jerry Ellis, Oklahoma State House of Representatives.

    The neighbors refer to me affectionately as, "The nut up on the ridge with the cannon." - MaxHeadSpace.

    Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!

  9. #9
    Vendor Sponsor

    DougGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    just above Raleigh North Carolina
    Posts
    7,395
    Where exactly is the measuring point for a pistol with a lead dust accumulator on it? Breech face with the bcg in battery to the end of the accumulator?

    What would be the cutoff point making one SBR as opposed to non-SBR? 17.5" would not be considered SBR correct?
    Last edited by DougGuy; 01-16-2023 at 06:09 PM.
    Got a .22 .30 .32 .357 .38 .40 .41 .44 .45 .480 or .500 S&W cylinder that needs throats honed? 9mm, 10mm/40S&W, 45 ACP pistol barrel that won't "plunk" your handloads? 480 Ruger or 475 Linebaugh cylinder that needs the "step" reamed to 6° 30min chamfer? Click here to send me a PM You can also find me on Facebook Click Here.

  10. #10
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,305
    Quote Originally Posted by jdgabbard View Post
    Larry, you need to read the new 290 page rule. The 4999 is now out. Its completely gray with no black and white except for they're basically telling you anything they THINK could be used to shoulder a weapon is now considered a redesign.
    Sorry, but I have read it. Suggest you do so also. Got table of contents and find Section B. There you will find in the regulation how Form 4999 is to be used;

    "B. Application of Proposed ATF Worksheet 4999 Similar to the Factoring Criteria for Weapons, ATF Form 4590 (“Form 4590”), which is used for the importation of pistols and revolvers, the proposed ATF Worksheet 4999 contained a point system assigning a weighted value to various characteristics of the fully assembled firearm, as configured when submitted for classification. Under the proposed worksheet, a firearm accumulating fewer than 4 points in Section II (Accessory Characteristics), and fewer than 4 points in Section III (Configuration of Weapon), would have been generally determined not to be designed to be fired from the shoulder, unless there was evidence that the manufacturer or maker expressly intended to design the weapon to be fired from the shoulder. A firearm accumulating 4 points or more in Section II or Section III would have indicated that not only is the “brace” device more suitable as a shoulder stock but also that the firearm’s overall configuration with the “brace” attached was designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. See 86 FR at 30828–30.


    The proposed Worksheet 4999 assigned point values for the objective design characteristics or features that are common to rifles, features associated with shoulder stocks, and features limiting the ability to use the “stabilizing brace” as an actual “brace.” These point values ranged from 0 to 4 points based upon the degree of the indicator, explained as follows: • 1 point: Minor Indicator (the weapon could be fired from the shoulder) • 2 points: Moderate Indicator (the weapon may be designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder) • 3 points: Strong Indicator (the weapon is likely designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder) • 4 points: Decisive Indicator (the weapon is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder) The point values associated with particular features or designs were based upon their relative importance in classifying the firearm under Federal law. Therefore, more points were assigned to design features that more strongly indicated the manufacturer or maker’s intent was to produce a shoulder-fired weapon. The various factors on the Worksheet 4999 fell into two categories—Accessory Characteristics and Configuration of the Weapon. The NPRM explained the criteria that would be considered and why they were important in making classifications of firearms with attached “stabilizing braces.” Id. at 30831–34. As stated above, if the total point value of the firearm submitted was equal to or greater than 4—in either Section II (Accessory Characteristics) or III (Configuration of a Weapon)—then the firearm, with the attached “stabilizing brace,” would be determined to be “designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” or a “rifle” under the GCA and NFA. And, if the attached barrel was also less than 16 inches, the firearm would be classified as a “short-barreled rifle” under the GCA and come under the NFA definition of “firearm.” Section IV of the NPRM provided examples of how the factoring criteria in Worksheet 4999 would be implemented with respect to three weapons with common “stabilizing braces” attached. Id. at 30834–43. Under these examples, the NPRM showed that, in applying the factors of the worksheet: (1) an AR-Type Firearm with SBMini Accessory would be classified as a pistol with an attached “stabilizing brace” because it garnered three points in each of Section II and III; (2) an AR-Type Firearm with SBA3 Accessory would be classified as a “short-barreled rifle” subject to the NFA because it garnered eight points in Section II and five points in Section III; and (3) an AR-Type Firearm with Shockwave Blade Accessory as configured would also be classified as a short-barreled rifle subject to the NFA because it garnered five points in Section II and 14 points in Section III.

    That is what is in the regulation. Can you provide ATFs statement that the Form 4999 will not be used?
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  11. #11
    Banner Sponsor

    lar45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    2,823
    Quote Originally Posted by DougGuy View Post
    Where exactly is the measuring point for a pistol with a lead dust accumulator on it? Breech face with the bcg in battery to the end of the accumulator?

    What would be the cutoff point making one SBR as opposed to non-SBR? 17.5" would not be considered SBR correct?
    16" is legal, but your lead dust accumulator will have to be permanantly affixed.

    I'm only on page 26 out of 293...

  12. #12
    Boolit Master
    jdgabbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,422
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Gibson View Post
    Sorry, but I have read it. Suggest you do so also. Got table of contents and find Section B. There you will find in the regulation how Form 4999 is to be used;

    "B. Application of Proposed ATF Worksheet 4999 Similar to the Factoring Criteria for Weapons, ATF Form 4590 (“Form 4590”), which is used for the importation of pistols and revolvers, the proposed ATF Worksheet 4999 contained a point system assigning a weighted value to various characteristics of the fully assembled firearm, as configured when submitted for classification. Under the proposed worksheet, a firearm accumulating fewer than 4 points in Section II (Accessory Characteristics), and fewer than 4 points in Section III (Configuration of Weapon), would have been generally determined not to be designed to be fired from the shoulder, unless there was evidence that the manufacturer or maker expressly intended to design the weapon to be fired from the shoulder. A firearm accumulating 4 points or more in Section II or Section III would have indicated that not only is the “brace” device more suitable as a shoulder stock but also that the firearm’s overall configuration with the “brace” attached was designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. See 86 FR at 30828–30.


    The proposed Worksheet 4999 assigned point values for the objective design characteristics or features that are common to rifles, features associated with shoulder stocks, and features limiting the ability to use the “stabilizing brace” as an actual “brace.” These point values ranged from 0 to 4 points based upon the degree of the indicator, explained as follows: • 1 point: Minor Indicator (the weapon could be fired from the shoulder) • 2 points: Moderate Indicator (the weapon may be designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder) • 3 points: Strong Indicator (the weapon is likely designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder) • 4 points: Decisive Indicator (the weapon is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder) The point values associated with particular features or designs were based upon their relative importance in classifying the firearm under Federal law. Therefore, more points were assigned to design features that more strongly indicated the manufacturer or maker’s intent was to produce a shoulder-fired weapon. The various factors on the Worksheet 4999 fell into two categories—Accessory Characteristics and Configuration of the Weapon. The NPRM explained the criteria that would be considered and why they were important in making classifications of firearms with attached “stabilizing braces.” Id. at 30831–34. As stated above, if the total point value of the firearm submitted was equal to or greater than 4—in either Section II (Accessory Characteristics) or III (Configuration of a Weapon)—then the firearm, with the attached “stabilizing brace,” would be determined to be “designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” or a “rifle” under the GCA and NFA. And, if the attached barrel was also less than 16 inches, the firearm would be classified as a “short-barreled rifle” under the GCA and come under the NFA definition of “firearm.” Section IV of the NPRM provided examples of how the factoring criteria in Worksheet 4999 would be implemented with respect to three weapons with common “stabilizing braces” attached. Id. at 30834–43. Under these examples, the NPRM showed that, in applying the factors of the worksheet: (1) an AR-Type Firearm with SBMini Accessory would be classified as a pistol with an attached “stabilizing brace” because it garnered three points in each of Section II and III; (2) an AR-Type Firearm with SBA3 Accessory would be classified as a “short-barreled rifle” subject to the NFA because it garnered eight points in Section II and five points in Section III; and (3) an AR-Type Firearm with Shockwave Blade Accessory as configured would also be classified as a short-barreled rifle subject to the NFA because it garnered five points in Section II and 14 points in Section III.

    That is what is in the regulation. Can you provide ATFs statement that the Form 4999 will not be used?
    Larry, that old rule you're looking at is just that: THE OLD RULE. The brand new one, just released on Friday, doesn't use the 4999 as stated very clearly on pages 8-9. So I would suggest you go read the new one, which states:

    "The proposed amendment clarified that a firearm equipped with a “stabilizing brace” device falls under the definition of “rifle” if the weapon “has objective design features and characteristics that facilitate shoulder fire,” as indicated on ATF Worksheet 4999, Factoring Criteria for Rifled Barrel Weapons with Accessories commonly referred to as “Stabilizing Braces” (“Worksheet 4999”). Id. at 30851. The Department published for public comment the criteria ATF considers when evaluating the objective design features of firearms equipped with a “stabilizing brace” to determine whether the weapon is a “rifle” or “short-barreled rifle” under the GCA and a “rifle” or “firearm,” (i.e., a short-barreled rifle) under the NFA. The NPRM also included the proposed Worksheet 4999, which assigned points to various criteria and provided examples of how the Worksheet 4999 would be used to evaluate firearms equipped with certain models of “stabilizing braces.”

    After careful consideration of the comments received regarding the complexity in understanding the proposed Worksheet 4999 and the methodology used in the Worksheet to evaluate firearms equipped with a “brace” device, this final rule does not adopt some aspects of the approach proposed in the NPRM, specifically the Worksheet 4999 and its point system. Instead, based on the comments received, the Department took the relevant criteria discussed in the NPRM and Worksheet 4999 that indicate when a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and incorporated them into the rule’s revised definitions of rifle."


    In case you'd like the link to the brand new rule, it can be found here.
    JDGabbard's Feedback Thread

    "A hand on a gun is better than a cop on the phone," Jerry Ellis, Oklahoma State House of Representatives.

    The neighbors refer to me affectionately as, "The nut up on the ridge with the cannon." - MaxHeadSpace.

    Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!

  13. #13
    Boolit Master
    jdgabbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,422
    Oh, and this gem from page 171-172:

    "The Department disagrees that it has not considered the interests of AR-15 enthusiasts by including accessories in the analysis of whether a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. The NPRM and proposed Worksheet 4999 would not have prevented AR-15 enthusiasts from altering their firearms, and individuals may continue to install accessories on a firearm under this final rule. However, if the firearm falls within the purview of the NFA (i.e., designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder with a barrel less than 16 inches) then the firearm must be registered in the NFRTR. The Department agrees that an unintended consequence of the proposed worksheet and the point system was that the addition or removal of a single peripheral accessory could redesign the firearm to be fired from the shoulder or remove the firearm from the purview of the NFA. Therefore, the Department does not adopt the proposed Worksheet 4999 and, as discussed, several of the peripheral accessories listed in the worksheet are not considered objective design features in the final rule."

    So, they made it a little more clear towards the end of the rule...
    JDGabbard's Feedback Thread

    "A hand on a gun is better than a cop on the phone," Jerry Ellis, Oklahoma State House of Representatives.

    The neighbors refer to me affectionately as, "The nut up on the ridge with the cannon." - MaxHeadSpace.

    Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!

  14. #14
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Las Cruces, NM
    Posts
    4,535
    I am glad I listened to 'my little voice' and did not purchase one. I just knew this thing would change.

    The bad part is they didn't make this decision years ago when braces were first proposed. They are shoulder stocks on pistols, no matter how anyone wants to fudge the wording.

    FWIW, I think pistol grip shotguns will be next on the block.

  15. #15
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Metro-Detroit
    Posts
    375
    I expect this to go the same way as the bump stock ban. Let the lawsuits play out. Fortunately we have a Supreme Court that believes the Constitution means what it says. I don't have a braced pistol and don't want one but I don't like our government restricting firearm ownership by law abiding citizens- period. "Shall not be infringed" seems clear to me.

  16. #16
    Banner Sponsor

    lar45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    2,823
    I'm only on page 63. UGH is this dry reading.

  17. #17
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,305
    I have been reading the ATF reg signed Friday. That is what it says alright. It is the criteria of the old form 4999 that applies to the new definition of "rifle" that is used in the new reg. If you read the reg, it does not state that "ALL" stock braces are now subject to NFA taxation. There are numerous references to "weight criteria", "criteria for heavy pistols", etc. There are still exceptions under the new reg. The part I highlighted in red says it is the criteria off the Form 4999 that is used.

    Further is listed in the Friday signed regulation is the new definition of "rifle" and includes the criteria and where it is adopted from [the Form 4999 to be exact as high lighted in red];

    Definition of “Rifle” The rule provides an amendment to the definition of “rifle” in §§ 478.11 and 479.11. In issuing this final rule, the Department has revised the proposed regulatory text in the NPRM to account for the comments received. The rule does not adopt the Worksheet 4999 as proposed in the NPRM. The rule does, however, adopt from the NPRM and proposed Worksheet 4999 several of the objective design features that indicate a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and incorporates those features into the definition of “rifle.” The final regulatory text for the definition of “rifle” reflects the best interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions.

    All previous ATF classifications involving “stabilizing brace” attachments for firearms are superseded as of [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. As such, they are no longer valid or authoritative, and cannot be relied upon. However, firearms with such attachments may be submitted to ATF for re classification. This final rule’s amended definition of “rifle” clarifies that the term “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder” includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a “stabilizing brace”) that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided that other factors, as listed in the rule, indicate that the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. These other factors are:

    (i) whether the weapon has a weight or length consistent with the weight or length of similarly designed rifles;

    (ii) whether the weapon has a length of pull, measured from the center of the trigger to the center of the shoulder stock or other rearward accessory, component or attachment (including an adjustable or telescoping attachment with the ability to lock into various positions along a buffer tube, receiver extension, or other attachment method) that is consistent with similarly designed rifles;

    (iii) 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;

    (iv) whether the surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder is created by a buffer tube, receiver extension, or any other accessory, component, or other rearward attachment that is necessary for the cycle of operations;

    (v) the manufacturer’s direct and indirect marketing and promotional materials indicating the intended use of the weapon; and (vi) information demonstrating the likely use of the weapon in the general community.


    Thus, we see the devil is in the details. The devilish answers not specifically addressed in criteria (i) through (V) come from the Form 4999 as so stated in the red highlighted part. Thus, the answers to all the proffered questions so far can be answered by referring to the pertinent section of Form 4999 because that's what ATF and the Justice Department will do as per this regulation. Note on Form 4999 that weight and length are the first section and if the firearm does not meet both then the 2nd section is not relevant. The only change to that I see in this reg is in (iii).

    Thus, I will have to rethink the sights on my Contender [it does not meet the weight requirement] with an arm brace. Not sure if the Burris Fast Fire is acceptable as it can be used on both pistol and rifle. May just go with a pistol scope.
    Last edited by Larry Gibson; 01-16-2023 at 09:50 PM.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  18. #18
    Boolit Master
    jdgabbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,422
    Larry, but you're missing the part where it says it will not adopt the 4999 (which was criticized due to it's relative arbitrary and confusing nature), and "Instead, based on the comments received, the Department took the relevant criteria discussed in the NPRM and Worksheet 4999 that indicate when a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and incorporated them into the rule’s revised definitions of rifle." In otherword, rather than using the 4999 it instead determines what is and is not a rifle by definition. Which is what you asked with this:

    That is what is in the regulation. Can you provide ATFs statement that the Form 4999 will not be used?
    I've done that very clearly, where I pointed out in the very text of the new rule the ATF states:

    "After careful consideration of the comments received regarding the complexity in understanding the proposed Worksheet 4999 and the methodology used in the Worksheet to evaluate firearms equipped with a “brace” device, this final rule does not adopt some aspects of the approach proposed in the NPRM, specifically the Worksheet 4999 and its point system. Instead, based on the comments received, the Department took the relevant criteria discussed in the NPRM and Worksheet 4999 that indicate when a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and incorporated them into the rule’s revised definitions of rifle."

    And,

    "Therefore, the Department does not adopt the proposed Worksheet 4999 and, as discussed, several of the peripheral accessories listed in the worksheet are not considered objective design features in the final rule."

    In your own quote you just posted you conveniently skipped over the sentence immediately before the one you highlighted in red, which reads "The rule does not adopt the Worksheet 4999 as proposed in the NPRM.", to point to the text that states (key phrase of sentence in bold) "The rule does, however, adopt from the NPRM and proposed Worksheet 4999 several of the objective design features that indicate a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and incorporates those features into the definition of “rifle.” Which state exactly what I posted in my original response to you: that they are instead incorporated definitions which will allow the ATF to arbitrarily define what is an SBR based on whether it provides any rear surface useful in shouldering the rifle. The point system is gone. They simply get to decide what is and what is not. No more 4999, period. And while I agree that this actually says very clearly that not all pistols with braces will be considered SBRs, the fact that by effect every brace will have likely be defined as having a rear surface useful for shouldering the firearm (I can't think of a single brace which defeats this definition, but feel free to point out one that does) means that from a technical standpoint ALL BRACED PISTOLS will likely be arbitrarily considered SBRs. That is why I pointed out in my first post this: Its completely gray with no black and white except for they're basically telling you anything they THINK could be used to shoulder a weapon is now considered a redesign. Along, with pointing out the 4999 is no longer used, in reference to when you wrote "There is a worksheet (form 4999) that is used to determine if the firearm is an SBR." I was simply pointing out that the 4999 is no longer relevant.

    The point I'm trying to get across, and there are literally hundreds of posts and videos from Attorneys throughout the internet discussing this, is that:

    1) The 4999 is no longer used, being instead replaced by a definition of what is and what is not a rifle.

    2) The definition is so gray as to allow effectively any accessory they say provides rearward surface to actually redesign the rifle to be shouldered.

    I'm just making sure the relevant information is out there. It doesn't matter to me so much, as I do not currently have any braced pistols. And as such, am not currently impacted by this rule. I saw the writing on the wall some time ago and applied for Form 1s for my firearms which would be affected. Though, I do outright agree that the ATF is overstepping here. And really needs to have the chair kicked out from under them.
    JDGabbard's Feedback Thread

    "A hand on a gun is better than a cop on the phone," Jerry Ellis, Oklahoma State House of Representatives.

    The neighbors refer to me affectionately as, "The nut up on the ridge with the cannon." - MaxHeadSpace.

    Jdgabbard's very own boolit boxes pattern!

  19. #19
    Banner Sponsor

    lar45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    2,823
    page 111
    Nevertheless, after careful reviewand consideration of the comments, the
    objective design features of rifles, and the administrative record, the Department does not
    adopt the proposed Worksheet 4999 and point system in this rule.

  20. #20
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,437
    So does having a buffer tube, make an AR upper with a barrel shorter than 16 inches attached to an AR lower, an SBR?
    QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check