Friday, January 13, 2023

Final Pistol Brace Rule Drops

 The ATF's new rule on pistol braces was released today. From the Department of Justice news release:

The rule goes into effect on the date of publication in the Federal Register. The rule allows for a 120-day period for manufacturers, dealers, and individuals to register tax-free any existing NFA short-barreled rifles covered by the rule. Other options including removing the stabilizing brace to return the firearm to a pistol or surrendering covered short-barreled rifles to ATF. Nothing in this rule bans stabilizing braces or the use of stabilizing braces on pistols.

Well, braces that comply with the new rule. As the ATF's news release elucidates:

This rule does not affect “stabilizing braces” that are objectively designed and intended as a “stabilizing brace” for use by individuals with disabilities, and not for shouldering the weapon as a rifle. Such stabilizing braces are designed to conform to the arm and not as a buttstock. However, if the firearm with the “stabilizing brace” is a short-barreled rifle, it needs to be registered within 120-days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

You can download the final rule here. A non-inclusive pictorial example of braces and setups that are deemed SBRs under the new rule can be found here. The proposed rule had a worksheet with fairly objective criteria and a point system to determine whether a weapon configuration and particular brace would qualify, but the final rule has dropped the use of the worksheet in favor of a more subjective list of criteria to consider whether a weapon qualifies so it will be impossible for someone to determine it on their own. (See p. 269). I view this as a conscious decision to make the rule as difficult and odious as possible. 

    One of the criteria that deserves a bit more discussion is how the brace attaches to the weapon. The specific criteria reads: "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[.]" Looking through the examples, this seems to pretty much rules out using a brace with any weapon other than an AR style pistol requiring a buffer tube. In fact, under the explanations given by the rule, any sort of extension--even if it is straight and offers no surface to rest against your shoulder--can turn a pistol into an SBR unless it is necessary for the cycle of operation. 

    Page 271 begins with the options for people that have a pistol with brace that the ATF now considers to be an SBR. It provides five options for firearm owners which I'll paraphrase below (see the actual document to get the specific legal requirement):

  1. Convert the pistol to a rifle by replacing the pistol-length barrel with a rifle-length barrel;
  2. Register the weapon with the ATF as an SBR;
  3. Remove and destroy the brace;
  4. Turn the firearm into your local ATF office; or
  5. Destroy the firearm (which act of destruction has to be documented).

2 comments:

  1. I've never understood the reasoning behind NFA's declaring "short barrel" firearms as restricted items. They did this back in 1934, and I'm still asking "Why?" An SBR is no more dangerous than it's longer barreled counterparts. In fact, they are less powerful due to velocity and muzzle energy loss from the short barrels...and they have no greater firepower (aka capacity). Maybe I am splitting hairs here, but SBR's are probably a little less accurate as well. My main point is, unlike full-auto, SBR's aren't any higher performance than their non-restricted 16 inch plus barreled cousins. I suppose that someone could offer the argument that the more powerful SBR's like AR's and shotguns are more concealable...making them more dangerous when used by criminals...but then again it only takes a pocket pistol to carry out an armed robbery or to do a "hit." I mean, if a guy takes a mini-Uzi into a bank...does it make any difference to the outcome if it has a folding stock attached or if it is just in a pistol configuration? Again, it just doesn't make any sense. And don't get me started on the restriction on suppressors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ian at Forgotten Weapons has a video on why short barrel firearms are restricted under the NFA: https://youtu.be/lsE0naVApPU. Basically, he says, the NFA was originally intended to include handguns and the short barrel rifles and shotguns were included to prevent someone from cutting down a rifle or shotgun to get around the handgun restrictions; but while handguns were removed from the bill, the SBR and SBS language remained.

      Delete

New Defensive Pistolcraft Newsletter

Jon Low published his latest Defensive Pistolcraft newsletter on November 1 . A few notable points and links from his newsletter: Right near...