ATF Reverses Itself On AR-Pistol 'Stabilizing Braces'

Link to PDF of the actual letter:

[link to www.tacticalshit.com]

MAGA

You thought your unregistered SBR would be legal forever!

Did you read the letter dipshit?

I did.

I hate the ATF as much as anybody, but I saw this coming years ago. They don't like egg rubbed in their faces, and that's exactly what's been happening for the last couple years.

Uh...

I love ya ET, but this reverses their 'Opinion Letter' of 2015 that states that just shouldering an arm brace makes it an SBR...

This letter states that shouldering an arm brace on an AR-Pistol does not make it an SBR...

This is a good thing...

So explain this to me like I am 5. What is a NFA?

1st. Why would I want a pistol with a stabilizing brace that still requires a CCW when I do not need a CCW for my AR-15.

2nd. Anything short of a 16" barrel cuts down the maximum effective range and twist ratio thus neutering the lethal capacity of a 5.56 NATO round which is designed to flip upon impact creating maximum damage.

3rd. Are these "PISTOLS" semi-auto? Do these pistols somehow create a loophole to bypass existing CLASS 3 LICENSING otherwise why would you want to carry a pistol that weighs almost as much as a rifle?

NFA = National Firearms Act of 1934

I have no idea what you are talking about needing a CCW...Has nothing whatsoever to do with this issue...

Your '2nd' question also has no bearing on this issue...

The answer to your '3rd' question (really your fourth), is "Yes"...These are AR 'type' pistols...They come with a short barrel and only a buffer tube on the rear...

The 'Stabilizing Braces' that are sold, attach to the buffer tube and wrap around the forearm of the shooter, thus 'stabilizing' the firearm...

You're right. I was completely off.

My brain doesn't work before coffee.

Still, this is the federal government, and they have NEVER been known to relinquish power, so I am waiting for the other shoe to drop.

If you think AR only comes in 5.56/.223 you should have way more questions than that. 300 blk is IDEAL for a 9-10.5 barrel and makes a great AR pistol. The only way you would need a CCW for this is if you live in a state with open carry of long guns. Considering it is a pistol it would not be wise to try, but neither would CCW a weapon that size for personal defense. They do make GREAT truck guns though!!

So the vernacular here is fucked up then. I know what the national firearms act is and where I come from, a tax stamp is refered to as a class 3 ffl so the manner in which a " a nfa firearm" was kind of retarded and made no sense.

A far as a CCW, anything constituting a pistol requires a ccw permit to be carried concealed or an open carry permit to be carried in the open like here in Texas but my AR-15 does not require either so does the SBR pistol designation apply or is the vernacular fucked in this situation as well? Furthermore, why would you want a weapon that loses the characteristics giving it it's lethality by shortening the barrel? 16" is about as short as you can go without affecting the twist ratio of a 5.56 NATO round thus neutering the round's designed lethality.

As far as my 3rd question, it wasn't my 4th question because I knew what the national firearms act is and to abbreviate it and refer to it in such a manner shows that the GED high school dropout that wrote that does himself no favors by describing it in such a manner. I said explain this to me like I was 5, not retarded. Unless a SBR pistol allowed a FULL-AUTO CONFIGURATION LOOP HOLE, all you mental midgets are doing is tying one hand behind your back by shortening the barrel of a rifle. It is like taking a corvette and putting 4 spare donut tires on it thus rendering it useless for it's intended design. I am sure a shortened barrel looks cool the same way a $1500 piece of shit Oldsmobile looks cool with $5000 rims and a $5000 jungle bunny sound system but it won't get you very far when you need it most and these pistol rifles are no different

Good on you for admitting youre wrong, nobody else does that here very much.

I took the brace off mine altogether btw, it wasn't worth it as a trunk gun.

Youre correct in that its deficient. I thought it would make a better truck gun with higher capacity. It doesn't. It has become more of a range toy honestly. But it is good enough for government work ... literally. I can hit torsos at fair distance which is all I care about.

If I need small groups in my daily life, ive made some really bad decisions that day and Plans A B and C all failed me.

Im going to give my answers, keep in mind this is my personal situation within the laws of Ohio, it may not make sense to you as your area or situation may be different.

1. Because it can be loaded and anywhere in my auto with a ccw. I cant do that with a rifle. must be unloaded. In ohio loaded mags not in a separate locked box may be considered loaded. Im not wanting to go to court just to prove im right.

2. Yes it does. Its a tradeoff. Loaded SBR versus unloaded rifle.

3. I don't think anyone is carrying them in true carry fashion so weight isn't really a consideration

Great reply. I get that.

As far as a truck gun, I agree that where seconds and inches are a matter of life and death, I get where a truck gun of that caliber is usefel but if someone has already got the drop on you while in your vehicle, the vehicle then becomes an asset where you can evade by fleeing the scene or use the vehicle to move to a position of cover and/or comcealment.

I only even inquired because I wasn't sure if the LEGAL DEFINITION of PISTOL applied to these concerning CCW and Open Carry permits. I also brought up the Class 3 FFL compared to a tax stamp because the chosennwords and abbreviations undercut the discussion for those that have no idea and would ultimately turned off for fear of being excoriated thus demoralizing someone from pursuing a firearm because OP wants to make fun of them.

The authors of that article who are trying to sell a product should have approached this from the perspective that most would be clueless to abbreviations and would lose interest because of theirnignorance where the ignorance truly falls on the company for not adequately explaining how and why this helps their product. It is not just business 101, it is common sense.

This machismo bravado bullshit needs to end. NOW OP.

makes sense

like I said I try to answer correctly, but milage varies depending where you live and what your situation is. If I could choose between a loaded SBR and a loaded rifle of course Id choose the rifle every time.

In my situation my ccw doesn't allow me to hide a loaded AR in my car, but it does allow me to hide my SBR loaded. That's really what it came down to for me.

Shootings are also up in my city 40% this year.

Yes mostly in areas I wont go to and between people that were doing negative things, but I prefer a SBR on me along with a Glock 19 as opposed to just a Glock 19.

Born and raised in Ohio, live in Texas. Good points, thanks for taking the time to read and reply. Have been thinking about getting one from Atlantic for a while but could never justify the purchase until now. You sold me. Was looking for an excuse to get an AK but couldn't justify the need for another .308/7.62 unless it was a SBR but I did not want to apply for the taz stamp and pay. So this reversal negates the need for a tax stamp with these particular stabilizing braces?

I read where they passed a new law stating they get to kick you in the balls while you are dressed like Mary.

It's obvious why throughout history men die on their knees unarmed in a ditch.

Yes ... well I mean you didn't need a tax stamp before as it was designated a pistol. But yes, you do not need a tax stamp for a sbr with a stabilizing brace.

I will tell you however, you will find that these things are loud if you haven't fired one. It makes 223 sound like a cannon if you don't use something to redirect blast. You will not make friends at the range to your right and left. Its annoyingly loud.

and to redirect blast I prefer the Noveske Pig.

So these stabilizers allow the ATF to classify these pistols as rifles so you do not need a ccw? I may still be drunk but not seeing the point here of this article. Just woke up so still hungover

zip guns and people's grenades are the way to go, silly

add a few nut busters strung up on fishing line then triggered by a trip wire

maybe even a fougasse or two thrown into the mix with a chemical ignition delay

If you feelin' extra froggy, employ a homemade flamethrower

if that doesnt scare the piss out of any federalist dog, i dont know what will

All I can gather is that this means technically this doesnt classify as a modification which would reclassify it as a NFA FIREARM requiring a tax stamp and this reversal classifies these stabilizers as an attachment rather than a modification? That is what I meant by when I mentioned the tax stamp and making a SBR

They are classified as pistols

the ccw allows you to carry thim in your car in ohio


they are pistols with or without a ccw


there is no tax stamp in any situation

The reversal is of the original position that shouldering with the brace made it a rifle


the atf no longer has the position that shouldering makes it a rifle

it is a pistol


no tax stamp needed before, none needed now

I have to attend some work meetings, will check back in later

Last Edited by Pulltab on 04/25/2017 10:50 AM

Thanx bro

I agree...Another year or two (or an admin change), and we will get yet another letter telling us what this letter actually meant to say...

Fuck the ATF. WTF are we thinking?

can any of these "braces" be actually used as braces ?