1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically better than an sba3

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      In my experience, a little less comfortable but at least it holds a spare mag. And it's not a """"brace"""" so it's not impacted by the new proposed pistol/SBR rules

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If it gets more popular, it will be.
        Don't you know how this war on gun rights works??

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And then we'll find another workaround. Already have one in mind but I'm not posting it here because gun control feds can lick my whole asshole.

          Nope.
          If it's a handgun with an OAL longer than 12" and under 26" (over 26" is insta SBR now) and a weight over 64oz, then it qualifies for the checklist, regardless of brace, tube, stock, etc.
          So, let's do the checklist
          Sec II
          A. 0 points
          B. 1 point (to get 0 it has to have a feature designed to actively deter shoudering)
          C.if it's adjustable or telescoping it's 2 points, I can't tell from pic so less say 0
          D.maybe 0, if they argue that is a fin type without a strap then it would be 2
          Sec III
          A. LOP is definitely over 10.5", so there's at least 1 point, but if it's longer than11.5 it's 2, 12.5 3 and iver 12.5 it's 4
          B.if that's a pistol buffer without any notches it's 0, if it has notches its 1
          C.if they say that's a fin type without a strap, you will get between 2 and 4 points here (yes they ding you twice for fin and cuff type braces)
          D.rifle type sights/flip up sights is 1
          So at least 3 points, but if there's any notches in that tube it's over, if you have a hand stop, AFG, optics, etc it's over, if they argue that's actually a fin type without a strap then you're at like 12 points

          Yeah nobody is keeping track of the ATF bingo retard shit that keeps getting pushed back. And if it did, a lot of us MIGHT just be like fuck it, in for a penny in for a pound I'm drilling the 3rd hole glowmoron. You know, just maybe.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If it gets more popular, it will be.
        Don't you know how this war on gun rights works??

        >morons in chicago dont even get braces, they just hold the draco out, not even with a push sling
        >ATF: "we gotta make law abiding people felons!"

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          sooooooo fvcking true

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >reminder that zog only targets white people with these kinds of anarcho-tyranny schemes
          >Jamal isn't even allowed to gun a gun because hes a felon, and yet he has a glock switch
          >Ukrainians are getting full-auto m4's and AT missiles, hand over your braces goyim

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Like a kak blade but better, this truly balances out the pistol for 1 handed firing.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There's always a work-around.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There's always a weirder fish

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        there's always a weirder fetish

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Innovation always surpasses legislation

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There's always a weirder fish

      Innovation always surpasses legislation

      LOL no there isn't, what's next a fucking crutch? And then what?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Wait and see, fed.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That will still score at least 7 points on the sheet, 4 is a one way ticket to federal prison for 10 years.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The sheet only applies to guns with pistol braces. This isn't a brace, it's a storage device.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nope.
        If it's a handgun with an OAL longer than 12" and under 26" (over 26" is insta SBR now) and a weight over 64oz, then it qualifies for the checklist, regardless of brace, tube, stock, etc.
        So, let's do the checklist
        Sec II
        A. 0 points
        B. 1 point (to get 0 it has to have a feature designed to actively deter shoudering)
        C.if it's adjustable or telescoping it's 2 points, I can't tell from pic so less say 0
        D.maybe 0, if they argue that is a fin type without a strap then it would be 2
        Sec III
        A. LOP is definitely over 10.5", so there's at least 1 point, but if it's longer than11.5 it's 2, 12.5 3 and iver 12.5 it's 4
        B.if that's a pistol buffer without any notches it's 0, if it has notches its 1
        C.if they say that's a fin type without a strap, you will get between 2 and 4 points here (yes they ding you twice for fin and cuff type braces)
        D.rifle type sights/flip up sights is 1
        So at least 3 points, but if there's any notches in that tube it's over, if you have a hand stop, AFG, optics, etc it's over, if they argue that's actually a fin type without a strap then you're at like 12 points

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Except you dont even know if these are the rules and you say nope like a gay woman or badly raised child lmao fuck you wannabe knowitall

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's literally right here fucking fag, goes into effect the end of this month.

            https://i.imgur.com/5Gpxx2j.png

            https://i.imgur.com/mNi7ABh.png

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              except for the fact that the appeals court recently shut down the bump stock ban that was using the same legal justification as this ruleset, which has left an awkward silence from the glowies.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Oh cool, inly took 5 years.
                Maybe in 5 years an appeals court will overturn this, until the DOJ files for a new hearing, then it goes back into effect for who knows how long.
                Shit the CA magban was in effect for 5 years, then overturned, for 2 days, then reinstated and been in the courts another 2 years at this point

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                yeah, but now there's a recent case law that can be waved in front of both congress and a judge's face that shows even attempting to make this gay checklist is moot

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Still tho. It's a win. And once we win, it can't be overruled. We're one step closer to abolishing the NFA. It'll take years but it gives me hope. Progress is progress. Be grateful.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >If it's a handgun with an OAL longer than 12" and under 26" (over 26" is insta SBR now) and a weight over 64oz, then it qualifies for the checklist, regardless of brace
          You stupid bootlicking gay, just read the title of the proposal

          https://i.imgur.com/5Gpxx2j.png

          .
          This gay little points system only applies to weapons with stabilizing braces attached. This isn't a brace.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, and OPs thing will be called a brace, probably a fin type brace without a strap, making it an insta SBR.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It already has a classification under the BATFE as a storage accessory. There's nothing about this design that works as a brace

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                And pistol braces were classified under the ATF as not making it an SBR, until now.
                OPs is clearly a brace, maybe if it was further from the end of the tube it could got away with it, but not now.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It already has a classification under the BATFE as a storage accessory
                The ATF doesn't have a classification for storage accessories. Prepare your anus and tell your dogs you love them.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >repeating the same made up vullshit will make it true!
                K

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Holy shit that is AWB levels of retarded checklist

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >over 26" is insta SBR now
          Source? I combed over the proposal and can find nothing about it. All I see is that this policy covers pistols because >26" can be a "firearm".

          Firearm/Other is it's own thing distinct from pistols ,which is why if you have a 12.5 barrel or 11.5 with an a5 tube that you can have a VFG since verts on a firearm >26 oal aren't AOW's.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            4 posts below the one you replied to:

            https://i.imgur.com/5Gpxx2j.png

            https://i.imgur.com/mNi7ABh.png

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I had read that previously, but I don't think the prerequisite 1 means it's an SBR.
              It says a firearm must weigh over 64oz AND be between 12 and 26 inches.
              If a gun weighs under 64oz, I doubt that means it's an SBR. From all I can find there's nothing stating >26 is explicitly an SBR.

              It seems firearm/other as a category was forgotten about. I know in states like NJ it's a useful category to maintain compliance and still have a practical setup, I'm wondering if there may be some workaround for short, non SBR AR's that "other" becomes the norm.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I had read that previously, but I don't think the prerequisite 1 means it's an SBR.
                It does if your gun has a potentially shoulderable "totally not a stock" attachment on the back.

                captcha 0w0mh

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The brace is in a grey area, it seems it's only restricted on pistols.

                The parallel I see is 12.5 AR's with VFG's. Putting a vert on a pistol <26in makes you a felon, but >26 and it's fine.
                The brace itself has not been criminalized, it's specifically setups for pistols. Which is why it keeps specifying handgun configuration and not just a statement that braces=stocks now.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The brace is in a grey area, it seems it's only restricted on pistols.
                If the gun doesn't meet both prerequisites in section 1 (at least 64 ounces and between 12" and 26" long), and it has a brace or something else the ATF thinks is shoulderable, it's an SBR. The ATF isn't just going to turn their brain off and start this process all over again from the very beginning because people came up with a new "totally not a stock" workaround that isn't a brace like OP posted.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Where does it say such? There's already such a workaround with vert grips on >26 firearms.

                Now they may expand it, but the way it is currently written I see nothing written to indicate a braced firearm would be an SBR.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, if it's under the weight/under the min size, it's a pistol regardless of brace, if it's above 26" (but bareel under 16") then it's an SBR regardless of brace

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >if it's above 26" (but barrel under 16") then it's an SBR regardless of brace
                If it's not designed to be shouldered and has <16" it's not an SBR. SBR is a rifle, and rifles are designed to be shouldered.
                I know in NJ there's guides on how to setup non-nfa others because conventional rifles are restricted, pistols need pinned mags, and NFA isn't an option.
                If you can show me where it says >26 means an instant SBR I'd like to see it. But from my searching there's more to it than that.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Would you get in trouble for padding the butt on this thing?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Probably. They'd likely claim you were modifying it to make it more like a stock. Since it's classified as a storage device, you'd have to convincingly explain how padding the back part is related to improving the storage functionality.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That would add 7 points on the checklist.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nope.
        If it's a handgun with an OAL longer than 12" and under 26" (over 26" is insta SBR now) and a weight over 64oz, then it qualifies for the checklist, regardless of brace, tube, stock, etc.
        So, let's do the checklist
        Sec II
        A. 0 points
        B. 1 point (to get 0 it has to have a feature designed to actively deter shoudering)
        C.if it's adjustable or telescoping it's 2 points, I can't tell from pic so less say 0
        D.maybe 0, if they argue that is a fin type without a strap then it would be 2
        Sec III
        A. LOP is definitely over 10.5", so there's at least 1 point, but if it's longer than11.5 it's 2, 12.5 3 and iver 12.5 it's 4
        B.if that's a pistol buffer without any notches it's 0, if it has notches its 1
        C.if they say that's a fin type without a strap, you will get between 2 and 4 points here (yes they ding you twice for fin and cuff type braces)
        D.rifle type sights/flip up sights is 1
        So at least 3 points, but if there's any notches in that tube it's over, if you have a hand stop, AFG, optics, etc it's over, if they argue that's actually a fin type without a strap then you're at like 12 points

        No one even knows or cares about this lol. And they know this which is why they already delayed their "decision" 3 times, cope 🙂

        Probably. They'd likely claim you were modifying it to make it more like a stock. Since it's classified as a storage device, you'd have to convincingly explain how padding the back part is related to improving the storage functionality.

        >explain
        To fucking who? Are you fucking retarded ?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Just cram or fold a soft "cleaning rag" in the end for padding. It's not a permanent modification, so I guess you'd be in the clear.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Probably. They'd likely claim you were modifying it to make it more like a stock. Since it's classified as a storage device, you'd have to convincingly explain how padding the back part is related to improving the storage functionality.

      make a shoulder pad that buffs up the front of your shoulder. It's a part of your clothing, so it's not a stock. Add this with the mag holder and you've got what's essentially a stock with extra ammo. Get fucking dunked on, GAY-TF.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Fuck your stupid checklist bootlicking gay
    Fuck complying
    Fuck the atf
    Fuck playing by the rules nobody else plays by

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >anyone who points out that your workaround attempt to the comply with the law doesn't actually comply with the law is a bootlicker
      wut?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >if you try make a workaround to comply with laws and it's not actually complying you're a complying bootlicker
        Does it hurt to be this retarded?

        who are you quoting??

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >if you try make a workaround to comply with laws and it's not actually complying you're a complying bootlicker
      Does it hurt to be this retarded?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yes, you're complying you cuck. you lost your rights and didn't fight back.
        if you don't own a unregistered sbr and machineg gun you're by definition a complying cuck. call me a fed, call me a glowmoron, but people like you are the reason why we ended up in this situation in the first place.
        compliance gives legitimacy.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >you should have started a war with the government for your rights over 80 years ago its all your fault
          K

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          hes right you know

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Based

          >if you try make a workaround to comply with laws and it's not actually complying you're a complying bootlicker
          Does it hurt to be this retarded?

          Have you tried moving somewhere that doesn't suck ass?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >move somewhere where federal law isn't valid
            K

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              hes right you know

              Go back to R*ddit, fag.
              >K

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >being upset your shot idea won't be complying with laws so you freak out on everyone calling them compilers
                K

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yes, you're complying you cuck. you lost your rights and didn't fight back.
      if you don't own a unregistered sbr and machineg gun you're by definition a complying cuck. call me a fed, call me a glowmoron, but people like you are the reason why we ended up in this situation in the first place.
      compliance gives legitimacy.

      You're based sir. Don't let the comply cucks demoralize you. You are not alone

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This. I have a lot of shit the glowies would be mad at me for. And I already got raided back in 2018 in January. Fuck the feds. I don't care. I just get better at keeping it on the down low. The fact they raided me and I got off means I have a better understanding of how they work.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      [...]
      You're based sir. Don't let the comply cucks demoralize you. You are not alone

      The glowmoron fears mass noncompliance

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        PEEPEE POOPOOOOOO
        write that shit on every line.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/mNi7ABh.png

      Is it just me or is this unbelievably confusing in what it's actually trying to classify? I mean yeah it's the ATF I'm not surprised, but reading this.. it seemingly makes less sense than the old classification system

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I assumed that was intentional.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I’m gonna ignore it. Entry teams aren’t even wearing full MOPP or laser eyepro.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Trying to objectively define a very subjective and nonsensical classification and then having to further refine it once people start skirting the edges and gaming the system leads to a very complex and nonsensical system.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >gaming the system
          it's troublesome you would even phrase this like you did. If freedom is a tree, and one of the branches hasn't been cut off or strapped to the ground yet, you shouldn't think of the branch as a loophole. Shall not be infringed means they don't get to say what kind of handles a gun has. Shooting your dog if you don't do what they say is terrorism.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Is it just me or is this unbelievably confusing in what it's actually trying to classify?
        Normal day for the ATF

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        How many dogs do you own?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/mNi7ABh.png

      [...]
      Is it just me or is this unbelievably confusing in what it's actually trying to classify? I mean yeah it's the ATF I'm not surprised, but reading this.. it seemingly makes less sense than the old classification system

      It’s so when they Duncan Leno you they can easily frame you too.
      >he had crack and a unregistered fully semi automatic machine gun, as well as a machine coat hanger!
      >an anonymous tip said he was chud!!
      >sealed criminal history of being a bad goy!!!
      >anti government sentiments!!!!!

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/mNi7ABh.png

      Is it possible to use these rules to create something that absolutely cannot be a two handed rifle but still scores over 4?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Don't worry about it, because this particular worksheet was proposed by the ATF last year, but not actually implemented in the """final""" rule. The new officially-unofficial guidance is "if it has enough surface area to shoulder it, then it's probably a stock, but send us pictures of your weapon complete with your personal information and our people will assess it and get back to you on what they think lol"

        I can't wait for some dumbfuck with nothing to lose to ACTUALLY do that and then turn around and sue ATF for entrapping him into providing federal law enforcement with photographic evidence of his "felony" SBR ex post facto.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do you think this would hold a sleeve of pop tarts? I get hungry at the range sometimes.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Only one way to find out

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    DON'T FUCK WITH ME

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what is this internet nonsense everyone knows gun laws are invalid.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i would rather be a felon over putting that retard shit on my gun.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what does this have to do with ukraine? gun law discussion goes on 4chan

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      go back

      [...]

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The best workaround is the thordsen cheekrest. Problem is theyre not adjustable and they require a proprietary tube.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >FAB pointing foregrip
      Patrician taste

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Bro I love those grips. I can't find any cheap copies tho. And I'm not paying $60 for it

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I got one with the matching thumb stop for like $40 on opticsplanet. 100% worth it, so much more comfortable on my 10" AR

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Been looking for this combo and they've been outta stock for so long

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://www.opticsplanet.com/fab-defense-forward-point-shooting-foregrip.html

          Knockoff
          https://www.amazon.com/Fore-Vertical-Ergonomic-Nylon-Handle/dp/B0BLJHCY7C/

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >actually jumping through the hoops the ATF wants you to do
    Damn

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      basically. I'm tired of these dumbfuck cope solutions.
      >i-it's a brace
      >i-it's a binary trigger
      >p-please s-sir, I'm a good person, see?
      We should've focused on removing the NFA from the books, not this stupid cheeky shit.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Pro tip: have you all tried not buying guns / owning weapons? You realize if you all just stopped owning weapons then the firearm division of the ATF wouldn’t have a reason to exist.

    Just stop owning guns. It’s that simple. You’re not in the military(you have never served) just stop larping.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >just stop making money and the irs won't exist Lolololololol I'm so fucking smart

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pro tip: have you tried not breathing? You realize if you just stopped breathing then the sage option wouldn’t have a reason to exist.
      Just stop breathing. It’s that simple. You’re not intelligent (you couldn't spell intelligence) just stop trying.

      >verification not required

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I mean, it's practical, but they could've done better. Or is this supposed to be one of those "it's not a stock it's a mag holder hurr" things? Look at it, how do you think it would hold up in court that that isn't a stock? Or your braces for that matter? ATF clearly doesn't give a shit, just put a stock on it and have tools to take it off at the range if you get caught to "correct the crime"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Or make sure anyone that sees has an accident that no one else sees

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Braces and blades skirt by on the legal loophole that they are intended to be operated one-handed like a pistol. That's it. Replacing the brace with a magholder that can be shouldered in any way without any features to "encourage" one-handed operation is just a fancy stock for all the ATF cares.
      That's why you should just put a fucking stock on it and tell anyone who asks about it to fuck off. Even in an emergency you could easily replace it with a legal brace in seconds.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >is just a fancy stock for all the ATF cares.
        For what it's worth, the manufacturers have a letter from the DOJ stating that this mag holder does not meet the definition of a stock and therefore does not turn a pistol into an SBR. Obviously this is subject to change on a whim but it has already been reviewed and determined its not a stock or brace

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And multiple brace manufacturers have letters saying that pistol braces aren't stocks.
          It doesn't matter now, hence the rule change.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Right, hence my last sentence acknowledging that these classifications are always subject to change, like pistol braces. But for now, this mag holder is one way to avoid ""the checklist"" gayry.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              THE CHECKLIST ISNT FUCKIN REAL
              Its conjecture, its a fugazi, its a fugaze, its not a fuckin law passed by law making bodies and non lawmaking bodies dont have the authority to do so (recent EPA case)
              Some bullshit some gay pedant catamite bureaucrat came up with is only real *because* you think its real! Its a monster under your bed! Boo!

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                At first I was all
                Then I was like

                https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-new-rule-address-stabilizing-braces-accessories-used-convert

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >he thinks the DOJ is a legislative body
                You're so fucking retarded it's absurd. This is unconstitutional horseshit as proven in the EPA case last year.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You know if I could just pay an extra 200 bucks when I bought it, I wouldnt mind. But waiting a year? Kiss my ass.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i personally own no firearms, never have. i have an interest in them and always will though.
    but if you are even filling out paperwork with the atf, you are the problem

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hilarious.
    But the NFA is an infringement on my rights and should be repealed.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-new-rule-address-stabilizing-braces-accessories-used-convert

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >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.
      Damn, I didn't think they'd do it. I should have bought one.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh noooo, that sucks. Too bad the most popular rifle on the market is also the most modular, and any retard can buy a brace for $50 and slap it on his gun. Or even better buy an SBR-length upper and slap it on a stocked lower.
      Nobody cares, nobody will comply.

      >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.
      Damn, I didn't think they'd do it. I should have bought one.

      >registering your already legal guns, sending in pictures of them, and having to notify the ATF every time you move

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >get SBR privileges on a gun you no longer really care to shoot due to the ammo situation
        Yes.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >privileges

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >can actually go out and shoot your gun without the situation possibly turning into a police standoff rather than just looking at it at home
            Yes.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Show me one time that has ever actually happened

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Go outside. The feds haven't done that standoff shit against armed and organized innocent people since the 90s. For reasons you should already know.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Aaaaand they're all illegal now

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >10 to 40 million
      ATF can't deal with that amount of paperwork. Lol.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        To register them, no.
        But they will certainly charge you with them if caught, bumps up their numbers, justifies a higher budget, etc etc.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Is there a hard source for this 10-40 million claim? I'm having a hard time believing that, considering there have been about 302.3 million NICS checks since January 2012, and that would mean between 1 in every 30 to 1 in every 7.5 guns sold in that time period were a new braced pistols, when braces only really started catching on toward the later half of that time period.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Braced pistols have have selling for a decade.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >considering there have been about 302.3 million NICS checks since January 2012
          It's right there in my post you retard.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's also anyone who builds an AR pistol, and anyone who buys a PCC under 16" either braced from the factory or puts one on themselves. Hell you could even throw in shotgun builds like from a shockwave with an adapter, there have to be at least few thousand of those around.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is a bare buffer tube a stock if shouldered?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      do you think they care

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Historically you needed a slick tube. Lots of guys used to put a tennis ball on them. They haven't been made in probably 6-7 years because of braces but I'm sure they'll make a comeback.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Any buffer tube is a stock. Regardless of configuration. Read the "law"

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A round, bare buffer tube isn't one because it's materially necessary to the function of the gun and has no additional material to improve its shoulderability.
        An adjustable carbine buffer tube could be.
        The problem is that this thing is dead on arrival. It's toast. One of the suits next week will get an injunction put on it before 120 days is up and then it'll be fucked in the court.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Read the wording. Any buffer tube. They don't give a shit and will cite some BS bufferless design as evidence you had constructive intent and added a "stock" to your "SBR".

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're interpreting the language incorrectly. This is specifically about "accessories" (i.e. features that aren't critical to the function of the gun) that increase the surface area that could be shouldered.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >i.e. features that aren't critical to the function of the gun
              Funny story about how California politicians are trying that same argument.
              The AWB in CA was specifically to get rid of common firearms by banning "features" instead of the whole gun. They specifically went for parts needed, such as a magazine release. Now that they are getting called out on their ban, their argument is shifting to "you don't technically need the parts of the gun to have a gun".
              Except you do.
              Either the accessory is too rare to be worth banning or enough people want the feature to make it protected under the 2A. The middle ground is just infringement with different words.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Sounds like the CA law on "night vision scopes"
                >night vision goggles = okay
                >clip-on night vision = okay
                >thermal optics = okay
                >optics with integrated night vision = BANNED

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >You're interpreting the language incorrectly
              well I mean it literally says "shall not be infringed" unlike any of the other things, yet here we are

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        only if it's attached for the sole reason of the brace, Ar pistols still get a buffer toob, ol cheek pistols was right the whole time

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You're better off sticking a dildo on the end and claiming discrimination, moron.

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Should I just use the free SBR ticket to get myself a free SBRd standard AR lower?
    I have an sba3 on a colt style AR9 with a magwell adapter.
    Any downsides to doing that, besides being on a long lost of SBR owners?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If you're comfortable submitting photos, fingerprints, and details about your gun to the DOJ, then you might as well. Otherwise you'll have to continue using your carbine at risk, at which point you might as well put a real stock on it since it's considered an SBR now.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        After some thought, I think Ill take the brace off for now and wait a month or so.
        I can always just register it using a standard form and not have to deal with the potential of submitting incriminating evidence.
        200$ is not too much currentley

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can't seem to find the law the atf is following where pistols need to be assigned points. Sounds like the atf might discover what happened to the epa a little while ago.
    Or maybe it'll be a non issue for other reasons. Short barrel shotguns (And rifles, back when the government was poised to ban all handguns) were generally prohibited because the supreme court felt the military wouldn't use them. Conversely, full auto is generally prohibited because the military uses full auto. Neither type of firearm was prohibited when the founding fathers were still alive. These prohibitions might be reexamined soon.
    I can't wait to own a correctly configured m4.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >because the military uses
      lol
      spirit of the law
      2nd amendment is literally about enmasse military armed populace

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    is dat a bulpup?

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ATF brace laws:
    Protecting us from people who are fine illegally murdering people, but totally respect guidelines illegally enforced as laws and have no access to legally configured pistols.
    Whew, we are finally safe from them.

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it's funny, I used to think that the "they're taking ur guns" crowd was a bit nuts, but I think this makes me understand.
    I haven't been around for stuff like the AWB, but with the bump stock thing, the FRT thing, the form 1 solvent trap thing, and now this thing.
    I dunno man. I just uh. I dunno.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Welcome to the club. And remember, you can't ever unsee it.

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Stop wasting resources on work arounds. Attack the nfa directly in courts. While we still hold the advantage.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You're not wrong, but how many people are willing to encumber themselves for years in the courts battling it out over appealing a fucky ATF ruling that got handed to them? Remember the one guy who just took a deal and walked away when the ATF tried to bust him on selling AR receivers as "firearms" when they technically aren't? I can't say I blame him at all for not wanting to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money in legal fees even if he did think he had a slam-dunk case.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        court battles should be the job of the 2A grift organizations and arms and ammo manufacturers themselves. the average joe shouldn't have to individually endure the legal system on their own. the fact that these organizations are not actively fighting the nfa tells you everything you need to go. the nfa is the big fish from which all the other fish spawn. it's in everyone's interest to see it gotten rid of.

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why not just run bare tube and have a permanent thicc rough cloth cover like the suppressor covers that exist
    it would also be comfy, since the thick cloth cover would insulate the metal buffer tube from yourself in hot or cold conditions where it might accidentally touch you
    I don't know about the legality of supporting your gun by holding a buffer tube against your forearm, but it would also provide increased friction for that purpose
    could also probably get your anime waifu printed on the tube cover, and it wouldn't discolour too much since there's not much heat on it unlike on suppressors and it might even be a decent spot to wrap some small spare rope or an extra emergency tourniquet
    the cover itself might actually be a storage device with maintenance tools in it

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Those exist. Those have existed for a while. In fact rubber buffer tube sleeves were basically the closest thing to braces before braces were invented. People used them exactly like how you described. They suck for actual shooting, which is why braces became a thing in the first place. Besides, despite the fact that they're PROBABLY kosher, that's not the point; the point is that you're taking a crapshoot either way by conceding to the feds that they have the authority to determine through completely arbitrary means whether or not you're breaking the law after the fact on a case-by-case basis. Even if I were 99% certain they'd give my wrapped buffer tube the thumbs-up and agree it's a pistol, I'm not fucking rolling the dice if there's the faintest possibility they'll say it's an SBR. ESPECIALLY not in a state where I couldn't even register one if I wanted.

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why so many (78,000) IRS agents???
    It will be the IRS that will enforce the rule.
    because it is a TAX stamp !

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hold up, what if the buffer tube itself is machined in a way to make it usable as a stock? It can't be removed without rendering pistol inoperable.
    Has anyone tried to machine a stock into the lower receiver extension?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This sounds gay and unnecessary. This shit shouldnt even be allowed.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      what if the receiver + stock was all one piece? Is it a receiver or a stock? Both?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *