The Original CZ Forum
GENERAL => Right to Keep and Bear Arms => Topic started by: Winston_Smith on January 16, 2023, 08:29:13 PM
-
Does anyone anticipate that CZ will sell 16 inch barrels to swap out your shorter barrel in your Bren 2 pistol? I know that CZ has talked about this but has never come through. I communicated with Israel Weapon Industries today regarding my Galil and the service rep reported that it was doubtful they would do that. Kind of disappointing when you think about it.
-
pin and weld a suppressor
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230117/e9ed74f89e9887c807d7d812b35edf6b.jpg)
-
Don't forget to change a BREN 2 pistol to a rifle, in addition to the longer barrel, I believe you also have to use the 922(r), kit. I will simply strip mine down to the way it came in and wait for the lawsuits to take hold.
-
Video linked in the last VCDL (Virginia Citizens Defense League) news letter.
Five reasons not to hurry up and file for the "free" SBR stamp. The person speaking is a lawyer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndHI5rcrKaU&t=25s
-
No, all foreign-made "pistols" that had braces installed are now contraband and must be surrendered or destructed per the BATF's brace rule... Swapping the barrel makes zero difference at this juncture per them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK4gJeJ_CI4
-
The solution here is to become 922r compliant. Buy the compliance kit that CZ makes for the Bren. For the Scorpion, replace the magazine, pistol grip, trigger and muzzle device. Completely insane that one has to do this. Which gun rights group is challenging the constitutionality of 922r? Makes absolute zero sense.
-
The solution here is to become 922r compliant. Buy the compliance kit that CZ makes for the Bren. For the Scorpion, replace the magazine, pistol grip, trigger and muzzle device. Completely insane that one has to do this. Which gun rights group is challenging the constitutionality of 922r? Makes absolute zero sense.
No, if you read the text on the screen at time stamp here, it says 922r can not become compliant retroactively since assembly has already occurred. https://youtu.be/tK4gJeJ_CI4?t=56
So if you put a brace on a foreign made pistol before becoming 922r compliant then as far as the BATF is concerned that firearm is always and forever contraband and must be destroyed or surrendered. Sort of like how you can never make a "rifle" into a "pistol", you can only SBR it...
Burden of proof would likely be on the government, but that's their position.
-
The solution here is to become 922r compliant. Buy the compliance kit that CZ makes for the Bren. For the Scorpion, replace the magazine, pistol grip, trigger and muzzle device. Completely insane that one has to do this. Which gun rights group is challenging the constitutionality of 922r? Makes absolute zero sense.
No, if you read the text on the screen at time stamp here, it says 922r can not become compliant retroactively since assembly has already occurred. https://youtu.be/tK4gJeJ_CI4?t=56
So if you put a brace on a foreign made pistol before becoming 922r compliant then as far as the BATF is concerned that firearm is always and forever contraband and must be destroyed or surrendered. Sort of like how you can never make a "rifle" into a "pistol", you can only SBR it...
Burden of proof would likely be on the government, but that's their position.
So then is the Scorpion still considered as pistol since its US made?
-
ATF Says Imported Braced-Guns Can be Registered, Rule to be Published Next Week
https://thereload.com/atf-says-imported-braced-guns-can-be-registered-rule-to-be-published-next-week/ (https://thereload.com/atf-says-imported-braced-guns-can-be-registered-rule-to-be-published-next-week/)
-
ATF Says Imported Braced-Guns Can be Registered, Rule to be Published Next Week
https://thereload.com/atf-says-imported-braced-guns-can-be-registered-rule-to-be-published-next-week/ (https://thereload.com/atf-says-imported-braced-guns-can-be-registered-rule-to-be-published-next-week/)
So if imported w/ brace, it's now kosher so long as not "assembled" by end user?
Note that BATF in the past has tended to define "assembly" broadly, as any modification of your firearm -- changed muzzle device, handguard, or potentially even used a magazine other than that it was imported with (since magazines are potentially three 922r parts), then you may not technically be eligible...
Burden of proof would be on the gov't, but this is still a mess.
-
ATF Says Imported Braced-Guns Can be Registered, Rule to be Published Next Week
https://thereload.com/atf-says-imported-braced-guns-can-be-registered-rule-to-be-published-next-week/ (https://thereload.com/atf-says-imported-braced-guns-can-be-registered-rule-to-be-published-next-week/)
So if imported w/ brace, it's now kosher so long as not "assembled" by end user?
Note that BATF in the past has tended to define "assembly" broadly, as any modification of your firearm -- changed muzzle device, handguard, or potentially even used a magazine other than that it was imported with (since magazines are potentially three 922r parts), then you may not technically be eligible...
Burden of proof would be on the gov't, but this is still a mess.
It's a total mess. So, if I were to swap the barrel on a pistol with more than ten foreign parts with a 16 inch barrel and thereby create a "rifle," I've violated 922r. But if I put a brace on a pistol with more ten foreign parts and create an SBR, that's ok.
-
It's a total mess. So, if I were to swap the barrel on a pistol with more than ten foreign parts with a 16 inch barrel and thereby create a "rifle," I've violated 922r. But if I put a brace on a pistol with more ten foreign parts and create an SBR, that's ok.
I think both are verboten per the BATF b/c an SBR still has to comply with all "rifle" requirements including 922r.
This is from 2017, and not aware of any changes in the interim -- but then I personally have avoided NFA items to-date, excepting the forthcoming pistol/pistol brace/SBR proposed rule, so haven't followed too closely:
https://johnpierceesq.com/does-922r-apply-when-building-an-sbr-from-an-imported-pistol/
It seems clear both from statutory interpretation and from the trend in ATF guidance that 922(r) does apply to the making of an SBR from an imported pistol. And while there has not historically been a push to prosecute those whose SBRs violate 922(r), I must advise my clients to insure that their builds are 922(r) compliant.
More at above link including copies of relevant BATF letters.
-
It's a total mess. So, if I were to swap the barrel on a pistol with more than ten foreign parts with a 16 inch barrel and thereby create a "rifle," I've violated 922r. But if I put a brace on a pistol with more ten foreign parts and create an SBR, that's ok.
I think both are verboten per the BATF b/c an SBR still has to comply with all "rifle" requirements including 922r.
This is from 2017, and not aware of any changes in the interim -- but then I personally have avoided NFA items to-date, excepting the forthcoming pistol/pistol brace/SBR proposed rule, so haven't followed too closely:
https://johnpierceesq.com/does-922r-apply-when-building-an-sbr-from-an-imported-pistol/
It seems clear both from statutory interpretation and from the trend in ATF guidance that 922(r) does apply to the making of an SBR from an imported pistol. And while there has not historically been a push to prosecute those whose SBRs violate 922(r), I must advise my clients to insure that their builds are 922(r) compliant.
More at above link including copies of relevant BATF letters.
I think we will have to look at ATF's Q&A on this. As set forth above, it looks like ATF might be doing an about-face on this issue. I think they might have to otherwise they have to explain why they are essentially ordering the destruction of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of firearms.
-
I think we will have to look at ATF's Q&A on this. As set forth above, it looks like ATF might be doing an about-face on this issue. I think they might have to otherwise they have to explain why they are essentially ordering the destruction of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of firearms.
I think they already addressed it -- if you "assemble" w/o 922r, you're non-compliant and your "pistol" now "SBR" is verboten. If you yourself did not "assemble" it into its verboten configuration then your pistol now SBR can be made compliant...
-
So, according to ATF, swapping the barrel will fix the problem. So, CZ, will you start making these available?
https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/faqfinalrule2021r-08f-correctedpdf/download
-
https://rumble.com/v27wz0s-update-atf-pistol-brace-ruling.html?__s=owq086fot46optt5upxo
Received this from an email from Silencer Shop yesterday. So I have this question for you all - if someone was considering getting a braced PCC, why not use the current rule to buy a 922(r) compliant pistol (no brace) form 1 it as if it were braced, and saving the cost of the stamp and engraving - and then being able to add a folding stock when (if) approved?
-
You had to own the braced pistol prior to the regulation being published in the Federal Register. As of 31 January, no one can legally sell you a braced pistol as ATF now considers them illegal SBRs
If you attach a brace to a pistol yourself after 31 January, they now say you built an illegal SBR.
-
You had to own the braced pistol prior to the regulation being published in the Federal Register. As of 31 January, no one can legally sell you a braced pistol as ATF now considers them illegal SBRs
If you attach a brace to a pistol yourself after 31 January, they now say you built an illegal SBR.
I'm not sure this answers the question. If for example, one bought a Bren and a brace; didn't attach the brace, filed the Form 1 and received the tax stamp; then attached the brace. Not sure what's wrong with that. Anyone can apply to make an SBR at anytime. As for 922r compliance, ATF seems to be making a distinction between "assemble" and "manufacture." So, I no longer see that as n issue. Someone else will have to explain why engraving is not required.
-
I understand you can not buy a braced pistol. The intent of my question is - why couldn’t I buy the unbraced pistol, Form 1 it in the 120 day forbearance period, saving the normal cost of the stamp and engraving? Not requiring the engraving is kind of a head scratcher……
-
I understand you can not buy a braced pistol. The intent of my question is - why couldn’t I buy the unbraced pistol, Form 1 it in the 120 day forbearance period, saving the normal cost of the stamp and engraving? Not requiring the engraving is kind of a head scratcher……
Read closely. I'd think it'd have to be owned and configured or "assembled" no later than the day the rule is published. Doing after the rule is published would appear to be a deliberate violation -- if BATF can track the serial in their unofficial registry, then it can open you up to legal liability...
I wasn't aware that the engraving requirement had been removed -- I figured you still had to do it after your Form 1 had been approved, but I haven't read closely... This whole thing smells bad, and I don't think it'll be upheld by the courts, so I'd prefer not to have an NFA item if at all possible.
-
I understand you can not buy a braced pistol. The intent of my question is - why couldn’t I buy the unbraced pistol, Form 1 it in the 120 day forbearance period, saving the normal cost of the stamp and engraving? Not requiring the engraving is kind of a head scratcher……
Read closely. I'd think it'd have to be owned and configured or "assembled" no later than the day the rule is published. Doing after the rule is published would appear to be a deliberate violation -- if BATF can track the serial in their unofficial registry, then it can open you up to legal liability...
I wasn't aware that the engraving requirement had been removed -- I figured you still had to do it after your Form 1 had been approved, but I haven't read closely... This whole thing smells bad, and I don't think it'll be upheld by the courts, so I'd prefer not to have an NFA item if at all possible.
But you can make an SBR at any time. Are we simply talking about avoiding having to pay the tax stamp?
-
Are we simply talking about avoiding having to pay the tax stamp?
Appears to be:
The intent of my question is - why couldn’t I buy the unbraced pistol, Form 1 it in the 120 day forbearance period, saving the normal cost of the stamp and engraving?
Which is why I suggested that buying a "pistol" now and converting it what the BATF now defines as an NFA "SBR", not a "braced pistol", might in fact be a criminal violation for which the "amnesty" may not apply and unnecessarily opens one up to criminal prosecution in order to save the $200 stamp...
-
Your point being that for this rule, doing the compliance paperwork is only allowing a previously braced pistol to remain a braced pistol. And if you wanted to change the brace for something else, you would need to go thru the SBR process again? Even though most are referring to this compliance is for registering an SBR?
Appreciate your feedback.
-
Question 14 on the link I provided earlier says that the tax stamp amnesty only applies if you already owned the braced pistol prior to publication in the Federal Register.
-
Your point being that for this rule, doing the compliance paperwork is only allowing a previously braced pistol to remain a braced pistol. And if you wanted to change the brace for something else, you would need to go thru the SBR process again? Even though most are referring to this compliance is for registering an SBR?
Appreciate your feedback.
If you file the Form 1, you are registering your braced pistol as an SBR. Once approved, you can put a stock on it.
-
Your point being that for this rule, doing the compliance paperwork is only allowing a previously braced pistol to remain a braced pistol. And if you wanted to change the brace for something else, you would need to go thru the SBR process again? Even though most are referring to this compliance is for registering an SBR?
Appreciate your feedback.
If you file the Form 1, you are registering your braced pistol as an SBR. Once approved, you can put a stock on it.
Yes, the BATF is saying braces are now stocks. Putting a stock on a pistol makes an illegal SBR, among other configurations that can do the same...