View Full Version : You can shoulder arm braces. Again. (ATF arm brace reversal stuff)
Just saw this pop on youbtube and figured, since I hadn't seen anything on here so far. I'd post it to see thoughts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ-8aLuVzeE&t=0s
Diamondback
04-24-17, 22:43
Link with ATF letter:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/04/24/breaking-news-update-atf-reversal-letter-sb-tactical/
Now my question is, can I strap a mag carrier or two onto a blade or brace without some "Shoelace = Machinegun" butterknife-on-the-scalpel-tray deciding that turns it into a stock?
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170425/a81465925d1cd2bac605dfd140f80bf2.gif
Here comes the second coming of the AR pistol.
I think the more we undermine the left's position on guns with the shoulder thing that goes up, the better. :)
For the love of God just nobody send the atf any letters to "make sure"..
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
For the love of God just nobody send the atf any letters to "make sure"..
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Too late bro, I already faxed, email, snail mail, telegramed, and facebooked them just to verify.
I'm only joking, but I'm sure there are members of TOS that are already on this.
You can shoulder your SIG brace now. Amazingly enough the ATF makes a logically rationale decision!
Amazing. I have long said that the ATF was wrong and misuse the definition of redesigned when they stated that merely shouldering a Sig brace made a short barrel rifle or short barreled shotgun.
As is typical for the ATF Tech Branch, their rulings are often in comprehensible and not based upon rational logic. In this particular case, if you had followed their rulings logic shooting a handgun with two hands redesigned it into an illegal, unregistered aw. As is obvious to anyone reading this, that is absolutely silly.
Finally comedy makers of the Shockwave brace have been able to get the ATF to reverse its decision and use the correct definition of redesign. This results in a more rational and logically consistent result.
So as I've been saying for 2 years, you are not going to go to jail for shoulder and your Sig brace. While I recommend that you register the weapon as an SBR, this revised ruling confirms that you may shoulder the pistol without fear of being harassed.
“an NFA firearm has not necessarily been made when the device is not reconfigured for use as a shoulder stock – even if the attached firearm happens to be fired from the shoulder. To the extent that the January 2015 Open Letter implied . . .*
https://www.sb-tactical.com/blog/sb-tactical-announces-reversal-atf-open-letter-use-sb-tactical-pistol-stabilizing-braces/
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Ned Christiansen
04-25-17, 10:23
I think you mean the rubbery arm thing that goes upon the shoulder. :)
https://youtu.be/JFVFnmA32WA
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Until the next time some dingbat changes his mind that is.
Uh... The last paragraph can be interpreted as: all pistol braces are actually stocks and thus any attaching of a pistol brace is making an SBR.
45289
Until the next time some dingbat changes his mind that is.
Well, yeah. I figured that was implied.
Diamondback
04-25-17, 11:10
Too late bro, I already faxed, email, snail mail, telegramed, and facebooked them just to verify.
I'm only joking, but I'm sure there are members of TOS that are already on this.
And I wouldn't put it past Team Bloombarf to try to by hook or by crook spam FTB trying to get "screw it, we're tired of this, PROHIBITED" rulings on everything they can...
DB, who knows how such people think from firsthand experience among the local Political Class, having been educated among their children and successfully resisted their indoctrination efforts (God bless Rush Limbaugh for that!)
Uh... The last paragraph can be interpreted as: all pistol braces are actually stocks and thus any attaching of a pistol brace is making an SBR.
45289
"Objective purpose." Is what stands out to me.
BuzzinSATX
04-25-17, 13:47
As someone who thinks most NFA items should NOT be regulated, i.e. SBR's and Suppressors, I think prior letter was bull crap and this just gets us back to 'even'.
Ultimately, I want to see this administration move decisively on both suppressors and SBR's.
The ATF thinking more in line with current day American gun culture is long overdue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Uh... The last paragraph can be interpreted as: all pistol braces are actually stocks and thus any attaching of a pistol brace is making an SBR.
45289
Idk I think the letter is pretty clear...https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170425/9664bb6cb0777095d8e3ec6d1226f042.png
So it's ok as long as it's not fully extended? I have no interest in them, just curious
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
"Objective purpose." Is what stands out to me.
Yeah.
To restate it: attaching an item to a pistol that can objectively serve the purpose of allowing a firearm to be shouldered is making an SBR. You can no longer claim that you intended it to be a wrist support at time of attaching the brace or that it came with a pistol brace from the factory. Neither of those matter anymore. You can objectively look at most, if not all, pistol braces and come to the conclusion that it can serve the purpose of allowing a firearm to be shouldered. Thus it's an SBR.
What the letter does say is that after making/designing a firearm (attaching/removing things from it), the method of employment does not constitute another "making"/"design". That's good and logical. But everyone needs to read that last full paragraph again.
Edit: The specific pistol brace submitted by SB Tactical and referred to in the letter seems to have been deemed not a stock because it is both not intended to be a stock and cannot be used comfortably as a stock. Which brings up the point, if a pistol brace can be used comfortably as a stock, you might need an ATF letter to be sure it's legal.
As someone who thinks most NFA items should NOT be regulated, i.e. SBR's and Suppressors, I think prior letter was bull crap and this just gets us back to 'even'.
Ultimately, I want to see this administration move decisively on both suppressors and SBR's.
The ATF thinking more in line with current day American gun culture is long overdue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This^^^
I own both a registered SBR as well as an AR pistol with Shockwave Blade brace, and I like having the legal option of the pistol brace in today's NFA climate, so it's nice to see them clarifying this, but the NFA is BS and SBRs and suppressors need to be taken off the NFA list.
Now acceptable to shoulder the brace.
http://www.tactical-life.com/news/atf-sb-tactical-pistol-stabilizing-brace/
The actual letter;
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vzxy6ojxd1whd2w/Barnes-Stabilizing-Brace-Letter-Final-3.21.17.pdf?dl=0
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?195951-You-can-shoulder-arm-braces-Again
Gatorgrizz27
04-25-17, 20:56
As someone who thinks most NFA items should NOT be regulated, i.e. SBR's and Suppressors, I think prior letter was bull crap and this just gets us back to 'even'.
Ultimately, I want to see this administration move decisively on both suppressors and SBR's.
The ATF thinking more in line with current day American gun culture is long overdue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Completely agree. The NFA/ATF came about due to gangsters robbing banks in the 30's. Their purpose was to crack down on organized crime, like the urban gangs in Chicago and cartel issues we have today, NOT to harass enthusiasts and small manufacturers of niche products.
I'm just glad common sense seems to have won out!
I'm just glad common sense seems to have won out!
Common sense is not so common anymore so it certainly is nice to see
Now if we could get the whole of the atf to self immolate.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Them fighting this was a huge waste of time regardless. I'm glad they put out a statement in favor.
Yeah.
To restate it: attaching an item to a pistol that can objectively serve the purpose of allowing a firearm to be shouldered is making an SBR. You can no longer claim that you intended it to be a wrist support at time of attaching the brace or that it came with a pistol brace from the factory. Neither of those matter anymore. You can objectively look at most, if not all, pistol braces and come to the conclusion that it can serve the purpose of allowing a firearm to be shouldered. Thus it's an SBR.
What the letter does say is that after making/designing a firearm (attaching/removing things from it), the method of employment does not constitute another "making"/"design". That's good and logical. But everyone needs to read that last full paragraph again.
Edit: The specific pistol brace submitted by SB Tactical and referred to in the letter seems to have been deemed not a stock because it is both not intended to be a stock and cannot be used comfortably as a stock. Which brings up the point, if a pistol brace can be used comfortably as a stock, you might need an ATF letter to be sure it's legal.
Not really. Its not so cut and dry.
If it were, such rulings such as a handgun e.g. Glock which is intended to be fired by one hand cannot be fired by 2 hands.
Intent and design come into play.
And as we all know, ATF rulings make little sense to begin with. Like somehow if you're AR rifle barrel is 15.9inches, it is an SBR.
Link with ATF letter:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/04/24/breaking-news-update-atf-reversal-letter-sb-tactical/
Now my question is, can I strap a mag carrier or two onto a blade or brace without some "Shoelace = Machinegun" butterknife-on-the-scalpel-tray deciding that turns it into a stock?
No, you cannot put anything in the brace. Here is a better video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYMJ9yXVdjk
It's great to hear about this reversal. Now if they will just reverse the ruling that neoprene washers are considered suppressor parts"baffles" and are illegal to sell by Deadair Silencers.
And yet the wait times for Form 4s and Form 1s continues to increase......WTF?
And yet the wait times for Form 4s and Form 1s continues to increase......WTF?
You probably won't notice a decrease in times at least until all the form sent in before the letter are processed, so in 9 months to a year, it'll be go time.
It's great to hear about this reversal. Now if they will just reverse the ruling that neoprene washers are considered suppressor parts"baffles" and are illegal to sell by Deadair Silencers.
Yeah, that would be good. Though, as an aside, I heard that you couldn't buy them, but that a number of people were just making them out of regular neoprene. Which to me, not that I agree on this, sounds like something that the ATF might have issue with. Again, not agreeing, I think the entire NFA mess is just bullshit just food for thought.
And yet the wait times for Form 4s and Form 1s continues to increase......WTF?
Maybe more people deciding to get into the NFA game? While I all for shorter wait times, I also for more people buying guns and if people are seeing the paperwork and tax hurdle of the NFA as less of a deterent to owning SBRs, SBSs, Suppressors, ect then I would consider that a good thing for our position since it increases the pressure that we have. That said, I still of the opinion that it should be something that should be streamlined as ****, if we can't do away with it.
It's great to hear about this reversal. Now if they will just reverse the ruling that neoprene washers are considered suppressor parts"baffles" and are illegal to sell by Deadair Silencers.
FYI:Capital Armory is selling 10 packs of these. It was on their site last week. Apparently only Dead Air got the letter...
So while researching for my AR pistol build I keep seeing that as of May 2017 that the ATF just posted a new letter saying that shoulder firing braced pistols is okay, as long as the weapon wasn't setup so that the brace is interned only to be used as a butt stock.
How official is an ATF letter, can they just send it out and it's their new policy?
Yep - official by decree rather than official by legislative process. It's official until they change their mind again. If enough people keep bothering them and asking questions about stuff that should just be taken with a grain of salt we're more likely to get a shitty outcome - that's exactly what happened when the pistol braces were coming out and everyone demanded an opinion. Most people don't know what an sbr/pistol/tax stamp is and won't bat an eye at you shouldering a pistol brace. Shoulder it to zero the weapon, test accuracy, different ammo, etc. but don't draw attention to yourself, don't abuse the concept, and be mindful of people around you and you will be fine.
A lot of the problem was that every swinging Richard around was posting videos of himself firing with his SigBrace shouldered. Don't do that. The latest ATF letter said 'incidental' I believe.
It's so tempting to do a pistol brace build but I've been trying to stay away from it because there seems to be no clear definitive answer to the question.
It's so tempting to do a pistol brace build but I've been trying to stay away from it because there seems to be no clear definitive answer to the question.
If you do a google search there is now a ton of articles about the new change as of last month.
Also, just noticed this should have went into the AR Pistol area so if it need to moved it might help out better there?
hotrodder636
06-04-17, 11:57
There was not a lot of attention drawn by the ATF until everybody kept asking for "opinion letters" and clarification on previous letters.
I had a brace until my stamps came through but I suggest if you have one don't go out of your way to ask for clarification, don't post videos of "ATF said it's okay to shoulder" then intentionally shoulder for a whole shooting session.
It has been said before, gun owners can be their own worst enemies.
If attention is not drawn, attention will not be paid...
Gun owners can be the biggest idiots around. As a result give the ATF about 25,000 emails asking "Did you really mean it", and the ATF will be forced to take action.
Just stop f*cking asking about it and don't be an idiot.
I have a brace, it's setup to be used as a brace. I haven't shot it shouldered yet ( only shot it 2x, just finished it).
But if I had to use it to defend myself, I could gain advantage by shouldering it and wouldn't hesitate. I'll eventually get an sbr, but the pistol is just a fun gun for now. What I'm doing and my plans are well within the stated opinions as legal.
If you setup and use the pistol as an sbr, with the intent to use it as an sbr, it's illegal. The benefits of a stock make it worth the hastle to sbr anyways.
All that said, the law is stupid and if they weren't trying to enforce un-quantifiable ideas in the first place, the world would be better - nfa should be eliminated.
jackblack73
06-04-17, 17:05
If you do a google search there is now a ton of articles about the new change as of last month.
Also, just noticed this should have went into the AR Pistol area so if it need to moved it might help out better there?
There is no definitive answer because courts have not ruled on these issues. The ATF's letters are just their opinions, they are not the law. A court very well may consider the ATF's opinions when making a decision, but it won't necessarily follow it. Until a court of law adjudicates these issues he's correct, there is no definitive answer.
There is no definitive answer because courts have not ruled on these issues. The ATF's letters are just their opinions, they are not the law. A court very well may consider the ATF's opinions when making a decision, but it won't necessarily follow it. Until a court of law adjudicates these issues he's correct, there is no definitive answer.
That explains it better, thank you.
The latest ATF letter said 'incidental' I believe.
Correct. Here's the portion from the letter I believe you're referring to...
To the extent that the January 2015 Open Letter implied or has been construed to hold that incidental, sporadic, or situational “use” of an arm-brace (in its original approved configuration) equipped firearm from a firing position at or near the shoulder was sufficient to constitute “redesign,” such interpretations are incorrect and not consistent with ATF’s interpretation of the statute or the manner in which it has historically been enforced.”
There is no definitive answer because courts have not ruled on these issues. The ATF's letters are just their opinions, they are not the law. A court very well may consider the ATF's opinions when making a decision, but it won't necessarily follow it. Until a court of law adjudicates these issues he's correct, there is no definitive answer.
This is a solid summary/explanation. Ultimately, a court would be the only entity who could actually rule on the fate of a person shouldering a brace. Based upon that fact, if one is concerned with the repercussions of shouldering a brace (either intentionally or unintentionally) they should seek the answers to the following questions.
How many instances can we find where an individual shouldering a brace was detained?
From those detained, how many were arrested and/or charged?
From those arrested or charged, how many faced a judge or jury?
From those who faced legal proceedings, how many were successfully prosecuted?
Of those successfully prosecuted, how many actually saw jail/prison time?
From what I can find, the answer to the first question is that very few have even been detained for shouldering a brace. As one moves farther down that list of questions, the number of identifiable examples becomes exponentially smaller.
This doesn't mean that there is no risk in shouldering a brace. With the few examples I could find, shouldering a brace seems to only get people in trouble if they were acting unlawfully in another regard. Kind of like a seatbelt law. Most people will not be pulled over and ticketed if not wearing a seatbelt is their only offense. Now, if they're driving recklessly, speeding, etc. then you may see the seatbelt charge tacked on.
Keep in mind, any examples one can find likely pre-dated this latest opinion from the ATF (at a time when they were still taking the BS "redesign" position). Now that they've recanted that position, it creates even less of a climate where simply shouldering a brace, alone, can land someone in legal trouble.
Everyone has to do their own homework and determine their personal tolerance for risk. Just my 2¢ perspective.
HardToHandle
06-04-17, 21:33
Just go shoot
Even better, just go shoot and avoid commenting on the Internet in a manner that provides evidentiary value.
The reason for me starting the thread was to get more educated on the subject, the new letter from the ATF was mentioned to me at the gun store Fri.
I went in to buy my KAC lower to start my pistol build and the clerk asked if I was building a pistol instead of an SBR because it's now legal to shoulder fire pistols now.
This didn't sound right to me but I said I didn't know you could and my intent was to just have the pistol until I could get an SBR tax stamp back.
Then I got home and started reading and most articles are unclear, I figured most here would know a little more than a shop clerk.
After my build is done I plan to go shoot and not shoulder the arm brace, but after the new letter being posted I wanted to ask what it really meant and hadn't seen any other mention of it here on the forum.
first it was never enforceable.
second i really dont care what the atf thinks if unenforceable.
there are things that i do like form 4's for silencers. i cant get a can without one.
there are things that I error on the side of caution like form1's, because in 15 years on gun forums, and shooting public ranges, i have never seen or heard of an atf agent asking for papers.
if i am more likely to be attacked by isis, durring a hurrican in WV. i am not doing it.
i am not swapping stupid little german/czech parts for stupid little us parts.
if i buy a pdw with a stock that the ATF considers a brace its going to be used as a stock.
oh and **** trip tickets to, they want them filled out go for it.
There was not a lot of attention drawn by the ATF until everybody kept asking for "opinion letters" and clarification on previous letters.
I had a brace until my stamps came through but I suggest if you have one don't go out of your way to ask for clarification, don't post videos of "ATF said it's okay to shoulder" then intentionally shoulder for a whole shooting session.
It has been said before, gun owners can be their own worst enemies.
If attention is not drawn, attention will not be paid...
I keep hearing this, but is there any proof that too many people writing letters is what got the braces unable to be shouldered?
I keep hearing this, but is there any proof that too many people writing letters is what got the braces unable to be shouldered?
The letter was a response to an inquiry.
first it...
PM sent..
The reason for me starting the thread was to get more educated on the subject, the new letter from the ATF was mentioned to me at the gun store Fri.
I went in to buy my KAC lower to start my pistol build and the clerk asked if I was building a pistol instead of an SBR because it's now legal to shoulder fire pistols now.
This didn't sound right to me but I said I didn't know you could and my intent was to just have the pistol until I could get an SBR tax stamp back.
Then I got home and started reading and most articles are unclear, I figured most here would know a little more than a shop clerk.
After my build is done I plan to go shoot and not shoulder the arm brace, but after the new letter being posted I wanted to ask what it really meant and hadn't seen any other mention of it here on the forum.
Just go shoot it in the fashion the situation dictates. If that means you simply cheek the brace, wrap it around your arm or shoulder it, you are within the intent of the latest letter. This is why I suggested you get two lowers- one to SBR, the other to be built as a pistol. Since the original SB brace came out, I've done a lot of shooting and a lot of traveling with a pistol AR and it's served me well
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.