Are you saying simply replacing the stock with a pistol brace on a registered SBR lower makes it a pistol now?
- Thread starter rustyinbend
- Start date
That's not what I'm saying, because the legal definition of a firearm equipped with a brace is so fluid that I'll be wrong by the time I hit the "post reply" button.
What I am saying is that it's possible to turn an SBR into something else by changing the features that make it an SBR. At this moment, that means starting with a firearm that was originally manufactured as a pistol, and removing the brace and/or installing a longer barrel.
That's like turning a mother back into a virgin.
It doesn't work that way.
Well since they don't have the legal right to waive a tax, wait for it.
I don't wake up angry, I just find it funny how fast y'all complied with an illegal ruling, but yet you talk on here how y'all are patriots and such.......that's what's so funny.
Doc
No what's funny, is that y'all willingly bowed a knee so quickly without letting any of this finish.
It's VERY telling of how much y'all will kiss a boot. Y'all bitch about not trusting the government with the clot shots, but yet so quickly believed y'all were getting a free tax stamp......so fucking hilarious.....
Doc
Right now, while the injunction is in place, the approved SBR status is meaningless, and I can travel just like everyone else. Why would you suggest otherwise? The SBR approval is my "insurance" against either the lifting of that injunction, or any loss in the applicable court cases. I'm good if the cases win ... I'm good if the cases lose. Either way, I'm legal.
Trying to base anything on ATF rules is like mailing jello to the wall, but here's what was said in the past:
Note that this is consistent with the ATF's recommended approach for dealing with its determination that a braced pistol is an SBR.
As a side note, I cannot recall ever seeing a case where someone was charged solely with transporting a registered SBR across state lines without notifying the NFA Branch. It technically carries the same penalty as any other violation of the National Firearms Act so let me make it very clear that no one should do this - this would be a very dumb way to catch felony charges so just file the Form 20.
Amen brother. Follow the rules, stay out of jail. Break the rules, take your chances at becoming "Cell-Block-D 'Bitch of the Day'."
"short barreled upper must be left at home...."
Makes no sense... uppers aren't registered and aren't uniquely "tied" to a lower.
Makes no sense... uppers aren't registered and aren't uniquely "tied" to a lower.
The concern that's being (clumsily) articulated is that one must avoid "constructive possession" of an SBR. Since the ATF has never defined such an act and since there is almost a complete lack of case law, it's extremely nebulous and so you get advice like this from the Tech Branch. Pour through the NFA Handbook and you can find more examples. It really sucks, whether one is an FFL or simply a individual.
If in doubt, fill out the Form 20.
