Thread by @StephenGutowski

New: ATF Decision Could Lead to Biggest Gun Registration, Turn-in Effort in American History freebeacon.com/latest-news/at…

ATF is moving forward with a rule that calls into question the legality of 3-4 million AR-15 pistols and similar guns. Owners may have to register, surrender, dismantle, or destroy their guns if the rule is adopted. freebeacon.com/latest-news/at…

The notice ATF published today was meant to give standards for how to tell if a AR pistol needs to be registered as a short-barrelled rifle un the National Firearms Act or not. But it doesn't provide any objective measurements for things like length, weight, or caliber.

The ATF insists it can only determine if an AR pistol (including those with forearm braces) is legal to possess without registration by individually examining it. That means any of the 3-4 million AR pistols in circulation that haven't been specifically examined could be illegal.

The agency admits at least some braced AR pistols are legal but it won't make categorical determinations about models or brands of guns so the implication is most might not be and should be registered. ATF will waive the $200 tax for anyone registering during a grace period.

The ATF did not respond to any of my questions on the notice. It's unclear how owners are supposed to determine if their guns need to be registered given the vague & incomplete standards. It's unclear ATF even has the resources to register so many guns given current NFA backlogs.

When ATF first tried this in October, the Trump White House told me it would "ensure there is no interference with the ability of law-abiding citizens—including lawful firearms manufacturers—to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed liberties." No response this time.

The National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Gun Owners of America all decried the ATF's decision. They're still hoping to block the rule during the comment period--though the ATF is allowing just two weeks that happen to be over the holiday season.

Eric Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America, is already threatening legal action as well. "GOA will rally the grassroots to fight these regulations, and if they eventually go into effect, we will commence immediate legal action to protect gun owners,” he said.

The ATF guidance doesn't explicitly ban AR pistols or pistol braces, instead, it casts doubt on their legality and leaves their owners in legal limbo. Possessing an unregistered NFA item can result in 10 years in prison or $100,000 in fines.

The implication is ATF thinks the vast majority of AR pistols should be registered as short-barreled rifles. They're even planning a tax discount and special grace period to encourage it, unlike the bumpstock ban. That would easily be the biggest gun registration in history.

The controversy stems from the National Firearms Act of 1934. Passed in response to gangland crime, it regulates things like machineguns, silencers, and *short-barrel rifles and shotguns*. It requires those guns to be registered with the ATF and that requires a $200 tax stamp.

The issue is what qualifies as an NFA short-barrel rifle vs a non-NFA pistol. The difference basically comes down to whether it's *designed and intended* to be shouldered when firing. In 2012, the ATF approved the first forearm brace for use with pistols.

It approved a bunch of different designs after that but it also had an opinion out stating touching the braces to your shoulder constitutes *redesigning it* which makes it an illegal unregistered SBR (a felony). They walked that rather creative opinion back in 2017.

The devices became extremely popular after that and manufacturers made new braces with features similar to ones already approved by the ATF. Most major gun makers offer an AR pistol in their lineup. Smith & Wesson just announced a new AR pistol model this week.

According to their guidance, the ATF sees this sort of popularity as a problem. They believe most people are using AR pistols as a kind of loophole to get around NFA registrations. This is likely why they want to keep their standards so vague and subjective.

If you want an idea of how convoluted the ATF's decision making has been on AR pistol braces, just look at what they've explicitly approved as a pistol vs what they think is an illegal SBR. They specifically threatened the maker of the Honey Badger. Here it is in pistol and SBR:

Pretty similar, right? Well, here's the Sig Sauer MPX in pistol and SBR formats. The ATF approved this pistol brace configuration. I have no idea why this is ok but the Honey Badger pistol isn't. However, that seems to be the point.