SBR / Pistol Brace / Tax stamp situation – New Rule

Reef W wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Steven Krapfl wrote:</div>
I’m thinking of buying extra lowers and just having them registered for SBRs for free. thinking down the road, i could then make actual SBRs out of them and not have to pay the tax stamp per lower.

This may not work. To be free you have to 1) possess it at the time the rule is published which will be soon and 2) it has to configured in a way that is covered by the rule. The form says “To confirm the application qualifies for tax-free registration, ATF may require additional supporting documentation, such as photographs of the firearm to be registered.”

I’ll find out and let you know. I have 10 extra lowers in the gun safe, although not built, I will see. My FFL is doing the same.

….

Attachments:

1. 

   Its_All_So_Tiresome.jpg
   

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>waldo9190 wrote:</div>
and to believe that any of these changes increase the effectiveness of the weapon is also a false.

So you are telling me that you could shoot a short barreled AR with a pistol brace being used in the intended manner, as you could using it shouldered and shot as a rifle. I’m sure there are many people who would take you up on that challenge. Myself included. I’m not saying I disagree with the rest of your reply though.

I’m saying that if I were a criminal intent on using an AR for no good activities, it wouldn’t make a scrap of difference whether or not I had a plain old buffer tube, a pistol brace, or an actual “stock”. Am I saying if I were to sit at the range and print groups at 100 yards they would all be the same? No, I’m not. However, you’d be surprised how easy it is to hit an IPSC target at 100 yards with just about any sort of stock/brace combination. The only thing stopping anyone from ordering a barrel shorter than 16″ and throwing it on a lower with a full sized stock is your willingness (or lack there of) to follow the rules.

I really wanted to get one the last couple years but just couldn’t justify it knowing I would rarely shoot it and it wouldn’t be pleasant to shoot. Palmetto State had some nice ones. Either piecemeal or fully assembled. One with a suppressor would be neat but suppressors take so long to obtain I dont have the patience for it. Suppressors should NOT be on the registry! They are as much as safety item as anything. My buddy just stamped a beautiful SBR setup in no time and he’s still waiting on his suppressor stamp that was submitted before the rifle.

suzuki wrote:

I really wanted to get one the last couple years but just couldn’t justify it knowing I would rarely shoot it and it wouldn’t be pleasant to shoot. Palmetto State had some nice ones. Either piecemeal or fully assembled. One with a suppressor would be neat but suppressors take so long to obtain I dont have the patience for it. Suppressors should NOT be on the registry! They are as much as safety item as anything. My buddy just stamped a beautiful SBR setup in no time and he’s still waiting on the suppressor stamp.

+
+
That’s interesting. My buddy received his tax stamp for his Suppressor before the stamp for the SBR and they were both processed at the same time. Anytime the Government is involved I give up guessing how things will end up.

I built an AR pistol for hog hunting in Texas. we use suppressor on the thermals and a short barrel helps with weight length getting in and out of vehicles. I added the brace to keep legal built it with an 80% lower so no numbers etc. now I have to add numbers and register it to be legal what joke. It won’t hold up just the same as bump stocks. just in the mean time kinda shitty deal. also a nice advantage I could use my ar pistol in shotgun zones which changing to SBR would also change that. There were many calls and discussions in regards to usage of pistol braces and It was clearly resolved a few years back. This is just push back from Old Joes admin to further strip our constitutional rights. Many of the words were used to make it seem as late but more of words to change what is and was always illegal. either way we never should be limited on what we a citizens should be able to posses in the first place. full auto, pistol,rifle,shotgun, tank whatever. constitution didn’t limit only later bs came to play. How are citizens supposed to fend off a tyrannical government with less then equal power that was not the intent of the 2nd amendment. not saying I need a howitzer but I should be able to have one!