oldguysrule649

Further to HE's advice, which I agree with; note that not all 50 shots are at 25 yards. Recommend you check the gunforhite.com website and look at, and practice their specific course of fire.

For you Troy A4 owners, I just posted an update in the "ATF finalizes rules for Stabilizing Braces" thread in the National Gun Law Discussion section with updated information from TechOps International, the distributor.

Further to my above post. TechOps International posted an update yesterday explaining how to make your Troy A4 compliant. (Hint: just remove the brace.) or optionally convert it into a rifle. See link below. https://www.facebook.com/techopsintl/videos/1176474603234920

For those of you with Troy A4 Other firearms: recommend you follow the Facebook page of Techops International, the distributor of the Troy A4 Other here in NJ. A link to their Facebook page is below. I spoke with one of their representatives this afternoon regarding the implications of the ATF Brace rule. I don't think the ATF Rule has been posted into the Federal Register yet. So things are still subject to change and are in a state of flux. However, with that said, Techops and Troy themselves are in close collaboration concerning the brace rule and its various potential impacts. I came away feeling quite reassured that they will be offering us various modification options/kits that will enable us to retain our Others and remain legal. I don't want to elaborate and speak for them. Let's see what they officially communicate over the coming days and weeks. https://www.facebook.com/techopsintl

For those of you with Troy A4 Other firearms, recommend you follow the Facebook page of Techops International, the distributor of the Troy A4 Other here in NJ. A link to their Facebook page is below. I spoke with one of their representatives this afternoon regarding the implications of the ATF Brace rule. I don't think the ATF Rule has been posted into the Federal Register yet. So things are still subject to change and are in a state of flux. However, with that said, Techops and Troy themselves are in close collaboration concerning the brace rule and its various potential impacts. I came away feeling quite reassured that they will be offering us various modification options/kits that will enable us to retain our Others and remain legal. I don't want to elaborate and speak for them. Let's see what they officially communicate over the coming days and weeks. https://www.facebook.com/techopsintl

With the many 2A cases in progress, we often don't see the forest from the trees. Here is a positive assessment by Mark Smith, on the progress and current state of the 2A movement. Can't help but feel good listening to this.

Armed Scholar, who as many of you know, has a Youtube channel and has posted several videos related to the brace rule; also has a PODCAST by the same name. I just listened to his new podcast which focuses on the brace rule and runs over one hour. Very informative and worth listening to. In particular, he gives his insights into the topic of buffer tubes and surface area. (around 38:00 - 45:00) One implication is that even if we could just remove the brace and be good to go, the fact that our ""rifle" style buffer tube has adjustable notches (as opposed to a completely round "pistol" buffer tube) COULD still be problematic. Just an additional thing to keep in mind as things develop and evolve over the coming several months. p.s. I use the "Overcast" app on my iPhone to listen to podcasts.

Good question. But there are already two other threads already active on the implications of the brace rule. Recommend asking there. (I am not a Mod, just trying to be helpful and minimize confusion.) I am referring to the "If Braces are Banned" thread in this forum section and the "ATF FInalizes Rules for Stabilizing Braces" in the National Gun Law section. Mods should consider combining all three threads into one.

Yes, I noticed that as well. Btw, there is a history to this that I have vivid memory of. About four years ago there was a trio of troll accounts all having "fish" themed account names, greatwhite being one of them. At the time, I corresponded with the Moderators and the situation was dealt with. Perhaps that person has reappeared and resurrected their old thread.

Smithneil: Welcome to NJGUNFORUMS! Joining and managing to resurrect a four year old thread in your first and only post, seems rather suspect. Recommend you introduce yourself in the "Introductions" thread lest we think you are a troll; as was the original OP of this thread.

Thought it was odd that I had not yet seen a video on the brace rule from MrGunsandGear. He is an FFL and very knowledegable on NFA and ATF matters. Turns out YouTube suspended him from posting to his main channel. Here is the video he posted to Rumble and elsewhere. (His websites are Mrgunsngear.com MRGNG.org in the event YouTube takes down the below video from his "B" channel.)

Another informative video. One point I never new, that I want to bring to your attention, is that the prior approval of the ATF is required before moving an NFA item(such as an SBR) interstate. I know its early in this game, but this could be relevant if any of our firearms are reclassified as SBRs and you wished to relocate it outside of NJ.

Here is another informative video. He provides important clarifying information regarding buffer tubes and when (and when not) the surface area they provide would make it an SBR in the eyes of the ATF. He also addresses the additional complications those of us in restrictive states face.

Great catch! Quite humorous that they did not catch this. Sloppy as well. If I long press on the image when viewing on my iPhone, it appears as well.

I should clarify that regarding my earlier mention of Pistol Storage Device(https://pistolmountedsolutions.com/), it requires that your buffer tube be completely round. I confirmed this with the company. I.e. the buffer tube used on a Troy A4 with an SBA3 brace has a raised ridge along the bottom which precludes its use without swapping out the buffer tube. I do acknowledge that mention of this device may be a mute point depending on the legal analysis of the new rule and applicability to Others. Just wanted to make folks aware of this option should it prove viable. (And yes, kinda like putting lipstick on a pig.)

FYI, press release from SAF. Bold emphasis is mine. My concern is that the ATF's attempt to redefine "rifle" could encompass "Others" within that redefinition. I hope not but the bold wording below coupled with the ATF doc showing what appears to be an Other, implies our Others could be in play. With that said, IANAL, and this topic really needs NJ centric legal analysis. Nothing I have seen since the new rule was released makes mention of Others, which I presume is mainly a NJ thing. SAF RIPS ATF ‘FINAL RULE’ ON ARM BRACES, LAWSUIT WILL MOVE FORWARD The Second Amendment Foundation today accused the Biden administration of “once again trying to trample the rights of gun owners” by allowing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to adopt a “final rule” on arm braces for modern semiautomatic pistols. While the definition of a rifle in federal law should be clear, noted attorney Chad Flores, who is representing SAF in a federal lawsuit filed two years ago that was stayed by the court in anticipation of this new rule, it is clear the Biden administration’s new definition of a rifle ignores tradition. SAF sued ATF and the U.S. Attorney General in 2021 in a case known as SAF et. al. v. BATFE, et. al. SAF is joined in that case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. According to Flores’ analysis of the 291-page Final Rule, the definition of a “rifle” now turns on a bewildering six-factor test. This new definition can be controlled not by the firearm’s objective characteristics, but instead by what ATF agents in D.C. think of a manufacturer’s marketing materials or the firearm’s “likely use.” The new rule itself is forced to admit its dramatic result: Under this new definitional regime, “a majority of the existing firearms equipped with a ‘stabilizing brace’ are likely to be classified as ‘rifles.’” “The Biden administration’s new rifle definition overrides the true wish of Congress, to upend the reasonable expectations of stabilizing brace users and makers nationwide,” Flores said. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb noted the foundation’s 2021 lawsuit raised critical points about what has now been adopted by ATF. “When we started this process,” Gottlieb said, “we anticipated where the agency’s efforts would lead. With our co-plaintiffs, we will continue to challenge this new arm brace rule.”

Here is an initial legal impression related to the new ATF Rule.

I chuckled at the Glocks as well. Last year I rented a Glock 43 with a Roni/MCK conversion kit at Weshoot. I guess I was shooting an SBR without even realizing it. LOL

Agreed. Specifically page 3 of your linked document shows the example with an SBA3 brace. While it is not an actual Troy, it may as well have been. I see no difference between the pictured firearm and our various NJ legal Others.

I don't even pretend to be in a position or smart enough to understand the NFA/GCA definitions of rifle, SBR, pistol, Other, etc nor judge how this new rule document will impact Others (such as the Troy A4).Will await the determination of the legal experts in NJ. But my personal sense is we are on very thin melting ice. Hope I am wrong. Just throwing these thoughts out for awareness and consideration. - When Worksheet 4999 was in play, I would have agreed with HE above that Others would have been excluded. However the new ATF document does not use Worksheet 4999 and states its elements have been incorporated into the wording of the new Rule. After browsing the wording of the new Rule, I am not at all confident that it won't be applied to our Others. E.g. we have barrels less than 16 inches, revised definition of rifle, etc etc..... - Later in the document the ATF basically says that if removing the brace makes you illegal under State law, you may be SOL. - Trying to thread a needle here, but if in the end we must remove our braces, AND our Other is not an SBR; then this may be something worth considering: https://pistolmountedsolutions.com/ and see video below: p.s. Some of you may remember that several years ago the anti-gunners sent Murphy's office a letter specifically calling out the Troy A4 and questioning why is it legal. (Ie encouraging him to ban it.) I think the only reason Murphy and Co did not take action against our "Others" is that they knew this ATF ruling would eventually arrive and do the dirty work for them. Just my speculation.)

I don't see the Troy to which you refer. Can you direct me to which document and page you are referring to? With that said, I did see several AR type firearms with a VFG.

I have been a happy owner of an Agile 52 which I have in the corner of a spare bedroom. Laying the Agile 40 on its back is an interesting suggestion. However doing so would preclude you from using its CradleGrid system which is fundamental to its design and utility. I can also foresee the door accidently closing on your head or hand as you have the door propped open.

A little bit off topic but may be helpful. I could not accommodate a large heavy safe in my home for several reasons(no room for it on first floor, too heavy for second floor, hassle to move it in the future, etc). I went with a SecureIT Agile 52 safe three years ago. Very pleased with my choice, extremely flexible inline storage, not overly heavy for second floor, and effective enough for my needs. albeat on the pricey side. Worth considering depending on your needs, security priorities, etc. For staging handguns elsewhere in my home I use “Fort Knox Pistol Box”s. Simplex mechanical combo lock, built like a tank.

I think your alternator is fine. I would have your battery load tested. Even if it tests good or marginal, given its age I would replace it. Winter is coming.

IANAL, but I have not heard anything about the act of applying for more "pee"s(lol) triggering your existing FID needing to become one of the new expiring ones. So I would proceed and apply for your additional pees. Then again, if your SC house is going to be finished within a reasonable timeframe, why not just wait until you officially move out of this god forsaken state and not have to deal with any of this bullshit.