◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

Attention all FFL holders. Curious about the changes associated with ATF’s new ruling on pistol braces? Well, they’re holding some virtual trainings tomorrow and Wednesday. ATF announcement follows . . .

January 30, 2023

On January 13, 2023, the Attorney General signed ATF final rule 2021R-08F, “Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached ‘Stabilizing Braces” amending ATF’s regulations to clarify when a rifle is “designed, redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.” This includes a weapon that is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g., a “stabilizing brace”), that provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder, provided other factors (as described in the rule) indicate the weapon is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder. The final rule is effective on the date of publication in the Federal Register.

ATF invites you to participate in a virtual training directed at FFLs to assist you in better understanding the final rule. Training will be conducted through WebEx on the following dates/times:

• Tuesday, January 31: 10 – 11:30 a.m. ET
• Tuesday, January 31: 2 – 3:30 p.m. ET
• Wednesday, February 1: 10 – 11:30 a.m. ET
• Wednesday, February 1: 2 – 3:30 p.m. ET

To attend either session on Tuesday, January 31, please click on this link at the time of the training: https://atfeventscenter.webex.com/atfeventscenter/onstage/g.php?MTID=ea1bc5e74c615d072e1c4daf09fbd1920

To attend either session on Wednesday, February 1, please click on this link at the time of the training: https://atfeventscenter.webex.com/atfeventscenter/onstage/g.php?MTID=e767183dfff8f2d91069c6266c63f0523

Additionally, guidance on the Final Rule can be found at: https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/factoring-criteria-firearms-attached-stabilizing-braces

If you have any questions about the virtual training, or the Final Rule, please email [email protected].

 

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

49 COMMENTS

  1. Isn’t it? – what we originally said was a pistol – is now a short barreled rifle.

    Because – we were told to make it so.

    • Goody two shoes Gun Control enjoys gullible public support just exactly like it received in The Land of Lincoln thanks to zipped lipped Gun Owners who fail to define Gun Control as a History Confirmed agenda rooted in racism and genocide.

      Until Gun Control is justifiably viewed like its filthy sidekicks slavery, nooses, concentration camps, gas chambers and the like the dog is just chasing its tail.

  2. I guess the DOJ and ATF didn’t attend the training that says their ‘rule of law’ here is unconstitutional and not legal. I mean they got their asses handed to them in the bump stock thing and the DOJ got their asses handed to them on the EPA thing, where the courts clearly told them they can’t do what they are doing with this law making they did.

    • im about as pro bump stock as one can be
      having said that
      i think that “the doj and atf…got their asses handed to them in the bump stock thing”
      seems like kind of a stretch
      their record right now in federal court
      is something like 20 wins 5 draws 5 losses
      i dont believe “asses handed” happens until scotus does it
      and theyve had opportunites to do that so far and havent

      • having the court so clearly say, on the concept of them making law, “No! You can not make law!” is having their asses handed to them even if they might win or come down to a draw on other cases.

  3. The AFT invites you to incriminate yourself. Just enter all your information and they’ll make sure you are NEVER bothered again…

    • And then there’s that statement the AFT Supervisor made (at the recent SHOT show to the inquiring 2A attorney) regarding the Agency’s “88 Day Rule” and how it will be enforced…

      This whole thing is a trap. Doesn’t matter what any YewTewb influencer may say to the contrary. That supervisor’s answer proves the Agency is setting up a trap.

      • DCF ALERT: REMINDER

        Tonight at 6:30pm at DCF Guns East – Representative Ken DeGraaf & Representative Scott Bottoms!

        Come and learn about how you can help these legislators save our 2nd Amendment rights!

        “HB23-1044: Second Amendment Preservation Act”
        https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1044

        Join us at DCF East on Monday, January 30th at 6:30pm
        https://dcfguns.com/east/

        This is a notification I received from DCF a local gun shop here in Colorado. I wish it were at my location instead of Colorado Springs. I would love to show my support and ask them a few questions.

  4. The ATF has announced they believe there’ll be “60% compliance” with their new rule. That creates one hell of a lot of automatic felons. Crazy to even contemplate such a rule.

    • If they expect only 60% compliance then how is this whole thing not just a deliberate “gotcha”?

      CT expected far higher compliance and got less than 5% by some estimates with their registration scheme. They certainly haven’t spent the last 8 years rounding them up or dragging gun owners to court and that’s one very small state. I can’t imagine the AFT attempting nationwide enforcement. Especially with sheriffs and chiefs coming out saying they will not enforce the brace ruling.

  6. if the scotus rules
    that the atf overstepped
    and bump stocks arent machine guns
    theyre going to sell like hotcakes
    im going to put mine on an anderson lower
    thats currently sitting underneath a 5.56 16″ psa 1/7 twist heavy barrel midlength gas upper thats got a mpi/hpt bcg in it

      • It depends when he bought the Ammo..

        It depends on how much the Ammo cost..

        With the internet it is pretty easy to find cheaper 5.56 Ammo, if you know where to look and when to buy!!!

  7. ATF is claiming 60% of brace owners will register despite calls for registration boycott. If you own those things do not register something you bought and paid for legally. Show them they are wrong as this is not a law but a rule and it is unconstitutional according to Bruen. Don’t give in, fight back.

  9. Doesn’t look like much training is needed for this arbitrary and capricious cr@p. If it use to be a brace, it is now magically a stock. ATF has not magically been transformed into anything since they are what they always have been: a bunch of jack booted thugs. They are just part of the swamp that needs to be drained, turned with a plow, salted, and paved over; too bad the Republicans will never have the stones to do what is needed.

  10. I don’t agree with the ATF. But . . . just remove the offending stocks! With the stocks removed, you’re left with a pistol. If the pistol is unusable without the stock, modify the damned thing to work without the stock.

    And, please. A telescoping stock is a freaking stock, not a stabilizing brace. If you’re going to quibble over that silly definition, there’s no point in discussing the issue.

    Or, stated another way – I don’t agree that the ATF has the authority to ban SBRs or whatever. But, you’re not going to win any argument in which you try to define something as obvious as a gun stock, as something other than a gun stock.

    • Ahh Paul the atf responds. WE are not the ones who didn’t define it as a stock. The ATF is the one who defined it as a brace. WE didn’t create this mess the ATF did. Argue that with yourself ATF

      • Precisely. Before selling the very first brace, the designers sent samples to ATF, who ruled – this is not a stock.

        Then, when it became apparent that some people were shouldering a brace, the ATF wiffle-waffled around and finally declared, “Nope, still not a stock.”

        The ATF said it wasn’t a stock – not us. Sure, it might seem like a matter of semantics (as are “assault weapons”,”barrel shrouds”, and “shoulder things that go up.”) but all those points are worth arguing.

        So, Paul – STFU.

    • Paul atf man you need to look at every single one of those designs and know the common factor in them. That is that they ALL have letters from the ATF a stating they are braces not stocks.
      WE didn’t do this. This has been going on for over a decade now. WE didn’t get to set the definition so point that finger not the The People but at the ATF

      • I took an ATF this morning, and wiped myself with a Matt in Oklahoma.

        I don’t give a flip about any stupid letters from anyone, to anyone. I look at a lot of them, and I see a stock. A telescoping stock is a stock, no matter how many idiots tell me that it’s not.

        • Right – and an AR-15 is a weapon of war that shouldn’t be on the streets in some people’s eyes. Glad you’re not the arbiter of truth. Insert a buffer tube in your posterior orifice an go home.

        • I didn’t say it wasn’t atf Paul. I said the atf your boys named it. They created it not us. I never said what it was or wasn’t.

        • So my non adjustable brace is a brace according to you? Cool bail me out when the a-holes at the ATF come after me. You’re missing the point on purpose.

    • I mean that’s nice to introduce that and all, but they would need a simple majority in the Senate and the House to roll it back with CRA in 60 working days…. I am thinking in the Senate that isn’t a likely outcome. The Republicans could have tried this with the bump stocks too but they were apparently good with it at that time.

    • While it’s a cute acronym, “Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today” undermines the argument that they’re pistols, not rifles.

  12. So does this abortion limit one gun per submission as usual?

    So somebody with half a dozen braced guns with a family of six with a pre-existing gun trust translates to 36 sets of fingerprints?

  14. I am tempted to see if I can watch one of those sessions despite not being an FFL. On the other hand I am hesitant to click on a link that may give them my information somehow So maybe I will wait and let TTAG and Ammoland and the guntubers fill me in

  15. Mostly I’m just curious if they’re going to provide any examples of a brace equipped firearm that they deem currently acceptable as a handgun. All I saw out of the big document was a bunch of examples labeled SBR.

  17. Jerod on the youtube “Guns and Gadgets” channel seems to be doing a good job of summarizing the proceedings of his session. That stated the invitation should have gone out to those with their necks on the line and not FFLs, some of whom could care less. If the answer is that would have overloaded the ATF servers it would indicate that today’s braced pistols are in common use and the horse already got out of the barn. My only question would be about Shockwaves with Crimson Trace laser sights (not red dot, laser beam) as I understand Shockwaves as sold are still to be legal and Shockwaves with red dots are still legal.

  18. Less than 10,000 ATF Agents (officially 6,000+). over 40,000,000 Brace Owners (and that’s a very low estimate).
    Hate to tell the Fed Bois, but they have zero chance of enforcing this if we decide not to comply.
    It’s time for a line in the sand Folks. Past time really. I’m old, cranky and tired of being f*cked over by the government. I will shoot first.

  19. yeah I’m definitely gonna log onto the AFT site to read about something I lost in my boating accident

  20. This is really nice. I get this email 2 days after the final training wad to be done, and that was on 2/1, and it is now 2/3. What is up with this?

Comments are closed.