Jump to content
leo-польд

Others without brace

Recommended Posts

Question is simple - by removing/destroying brace as they like, others still remaining others? Or they become who knows what? I could shot my other at the range without brace, winter time is OK because of jacket and 5.56 is not Mosin :) Also with red dot only I guess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2023 at 12:15 PM, ESB said:

brace_chart.jpg

 

According to the pic from the ATF, removing the brace and making it so that it cannot be reattached would make it legal.  Remove the brace and store it at another location.  

This has nothing to do with the Other Firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2023 at 12:15 PM, ESB said:

brace_chart.jpg

 

According to the pic from the ATF, removing the brace and making it so that it cannot be reattached would make it legal.  Remove the brace and store it at another location.  

so....how do we make the other so that the brace can't be reattached?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

It's a direct reference to the new rule "affected parties and their options".  

Correct but effected parties is pistols with the brace, it is not other firearms because it is not pistol. BTW any reference in any new ATF document saying "other firearm" you might know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, leo-польд said:

Correct but effected parties is pistols with the brace, it is not other firearms because it is not pistol. BTW any reference in any new ATF document saying "other firearm" you might know?

The diagram say "firearm" not pistol or other. The new rule doesn't differentiate as is. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PK90 said:

Firearms that use shotshells, ie shockwaves, also are not mentioned specifically in the rule. Are they affected?

That's kinda tricky, I haven't read into it on that issue. But, however, I do recall the issue of the rule is primarily, "when a firearm is a rifle" as the criteria requires a comparison of a "Firearm" to a rifle it substantially resembles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JackDaWack said:

The diagram say "firearm" not pistol or other. The new rule doesn't differentiate as is. 

Correct, my understanding is that they are going after ANY firearm with a brace that has a barrel less than 16 inches. Take them all out in one swipe. Its either a pistol, SBR, or firearm. So for an other, its change the barrel to make it a firearm, of register it as a SBR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

The diagram say "firearm" not pistol or other. The new rule doesn't differentiate as is. 

which basically means that if it goes bang, and a projectile comes out at high speed, the brace is gonna be a nogo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, leo-польд said:

Correct but effected parties is pistols with the brace, it is not other firearms because it is not pistol. BTW any reference in any new ATF document saying "other firearm" you might know?

That was the original intent using the form from last year.  The new rule as of 1/13/2023 does not differentiate.  Basically, it now says any firearm with a barrel less than 16" and an attached device that adds surface area that can be shouldered is now an SBR.  Taking off the attached device and not putting anything else on would make it legal according to the pic they supplied.  

Moving the brace to a different location would probably prevent you from being subject to constructive intent.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

That's kinda tricky, I haven't read into it on that issue. But, however, I do recall the issue of the rule is primarily, "when a firearm is a rifle" as the criteria requires a comparison of a "Firearm" to a rifle it substantially resembles. 

I think it has to be rifled and shoot one projectile.  A rifled shotgun that shoots sabbot slugs might be subject???  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Correct me if im wrong.  But.   Its not the brace that’s illegal.  Its that the firearm is sbr.   The brace has a buttstock.  If you get rid of the “brace”.  They still consider it a sbr.  You can keep the brace. Just pin it to one position.   And put on a 16” barrel.  You cant get a tax stamp for it in nj.  I wouldn’t do anything until it goes on the register.  Or slightly right beforehand 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Golf battery said:

 Correct me if im wrong.  But.   Its not the brace that’s illegal.  Its that the firearm is sbr.   The brace has a buttstock.  If you get rid of the “brace”.  They still consider it a sbr.  You can keep the brace. Just pin it to one position.   And put on a 16” barrel.  You cant get a tax stamp for it in nj.  I wouldn’t do anything until it goes on the register.  Or go boating slightly right beforehand 

FIFY.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Golf battery said:

 Correct me if im wrong.  But.   Its not the brace that’s illegal.  Its that the firearm is sbr.   The brace has a buttstock.  If you get rid of the “brace”.  They still consider it a sbr.  You can keep the brace. Just pin it to one position.   And put on a 16” barrel.  You cant get a tax stamp for it in nj.  I wouldn’t do anything until it goes on the register.  Or slightly right beforehand 

The brace is not illegal.  Its the configuration.  Its the combination of brace+barrel less than 16" that is illegal.   If you get rid of either the <16" barrel or the brace (and do not replace the brace with anything else), its no longer illegal.  You can maintain possesion of the removed brace as long as there is no way for you to re-attach it to a firearm you own that has a barrel less than 16".  Otherwise you run into constructive intent.  Not sure how you do that.  Easiest way would be to have it at a different location.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But see.  That still doesn’t make sense.  Its not the brace thats the issue.  Its that its a sbr.   You can put a solid a2 buttstock on it.  Its still a sbr nfa item.  The brace is inconsequential.  Constructive intent    A brace you can put to your shoulder. Its a buttstock.  It all comes down to that its a barrel less than 16”.  The atf diagram is confusing    It basically says take off the brace and you’re good.  Ok fine.  But then you have a nfa tax stamp item.  Right?   And what defines a brace?    The velcro?    So hell. Take the velcro off.  Cut out the holes where you put the velcro through.  It not about the brace. I bring this up because if people think they can just put on a moe stock on their other and they’re gtg.  Its still a sbr. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Golf battery said:

But see.  That still doesn’t make sense.  Its not the brace thats the issue.  Its that its a sbr.   You can put a solid a2 buttstock on it.  Its still a sbr nfa item.  The brace is inconsequential.  Constructive intent    A brace you can put to your shoulder. Its a buttstock.  It all comes down to that its a barrel less than 16”.  The atf diagram is confusing    It basically says take off the brace and you’re good.  Ok fine.  But then you have a nfa tax stamp item.  Right?   And what defines a brace?    The velcro?    So hell. Take the velcro off.  Cut out the holes where you put the velcro through.  It not about the brace. I bring this up because if people think they can just put on a moe stock on their other and they’re gtg.  Its still a sbr. 

I think in NJ we need to get official letter from police similar to one we got for "others allowed" couple of years ago. That letter should say, fu... your money and your others and you are no longer should own them, as well as buy them or sell them.

Or which is very small chance

You could still own others and shot at the range but without brace. 

Or ...

Otherwise we are guessing and thinking everyone his own story.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The brace is considered a stock ?  By the atf diagram.  It says remove brace.  And gtg.  But now you still have a sbr in nj according to the letter sent to troy.  Saying in that configuration its a other.  ?????   Please explain.  Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATF says a brace is a brace, a stock Is a stock. 

 

If a brace is on a firearm with a barrel under 16" that is substantially identical to a rifle, it is an SBR. 

 

It's really not clear unless you just assume anything with a brace is an SBR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right.  confusing and ridiculous.   I need to see their brace definition. They’re idiots.   They are plain outright idiots.  More stupid than the floor underneath my feet right now.  Government employees at the peak of their intelligence.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, leo-польд said:

I think in NJ we need to get official letter from police similar to one we got for "others allowed" couple of years ago. That letter should say, fu... your money and your others and you are no longer should own them, as well as buy them or sell them.

Don't hold your breath for that letter, but essentially that's what you would get if they even bothered to write one.

No more others, go pound sand, we want all your guns.... this is only the first step peasants....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2023 at 9:58 PM, Golf battery said:

Right.  confusing and ridiculous.   I need to see their brace definition. They’re idiots.   They are plain outright idiots.  More stupid than the floor underneath my feet right now.  Government employees at the peak of their intelligence.   

You do need to read the updated rule.  Ignore anything you knew prior to 1/13/2023.  Prior to 1/13/2023 only braces where effected.  Now any accessory that "increases the rear surface area" that can be shouldered COULD  potentially (read almost certainly will) make it an SBR. 

I'm not sure why you think that if you remove the brace it is still an SBR in the eyes of the Fed or NJ.  The ATF has said several times that removing the pistol brace will make it legal.  A pistol brace was never required to make an Other an Other.  

Requirements for an Other:

1) Must be over 26"

2) Must have a vertical front grip to show it was designed to be used with 2 hands

3) Must never have had a stock on it.  

 

The pistol brace on an Other was a loop hole to allow you to add a useful accessory on your firearm.  It was never a required accessory for an Other to be considered an Other. 

Just remove the pistol brace (which is now considered a stock) and you still have a legal Other.  ATF says so.  In fact most NJ gun stores just removed the brace on their Others and are still selling those firearms as Others.   

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...