Page 21 of 54 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 539

Thread: SIG Brace Declared Illegal to Shoulder By The ATF

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Joplin, MO
    Posts
    1,690
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by SteyrAUG View Post
    Certain NFA items would completely lose their value like registered tube guns, sear conversions and lightning links.

    But my point is collectors really don't put big money into those things. A "registered receiver" conversion AR-15 will have the bottom drop out even if it is a no longer produced SP1 variant. But a true M-16A1 will hold nearly all it's value regardless of any changes in the NFA law because there won't be anymore. You can add clones to the registry but the number of original "collectible" machine guns like M-16s, Thomspson, M3s, BARs and Lewis Guns will continue to only go up and up.

    The guys who will sweat their investments are those who have sear conversions, registered tube guns, non collectible receiver conversions or things like MAC 10s simply because they were made in such large numbers.
    Eventually the prices on the collector and museum pieces would rise again, but the reason they are so valuable is because they are transferrable. If "MG" ban went away tomorrow you can't tell me that all those dealer sample MG's hitting the market wouldn't be a giant blow to the value of a good portion of the MG market. Pre-may dealer samples sell for half or less than fully transferrable examples.
    Last edited by wildcard600; 12-29-14 at 22:07.
    "I pity thou, fools who dost not choose BCM" - King Arthur 517 A.D.

    .OlllllllO.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    222
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    This just popped-up on another forum;

    From a post by F3 Tactical Inc via Breach-Bang-Clear on social media...

    Quote:
    Word today from a very well respected member of our community, the Law Enforcement Community and the Firearms Industry. This is all I have been told. Thanks for the heads up brother!!

    "Word from a local ATF Agent who reached out to the Firearms Tech Branch is that an official decision has been made on the Sig Brace issue:

    They are reversing the earlier opinion and using established case law and precedent, stating a firearm may be classified based upon its use. Attorneys from Sig are on board, stating it was never intended to be used in a shoulder fired position.

    They are in the process of producing an industry circular, and public bulletin which will address it shortly."

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,303
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    SIG Brace Declared Illegal to Shoulder By The ATF

    Quote Originally Posted by Dump1567 View Post
    This just popped-up on another forum;
    Well now this is really gonna make things interesting....can't wait to read it :sarcasm:


    I'll be pissed if the ATF letter doesn't say at the end

    "Thanks for all your concerning letters!"
    Last edited by JulyAZ; 12-29-14 at 22:19.

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OUTPOST 31
    Posts
    10,455
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    So the established case law and earlier precedent they overlooked when formulating their previous opinion? I call BS about SIGs attorneys too but at any rate it's hearsay until something official comes out.
    “Answer The Bell...” J.W.

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,303
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    SIG Brace Declared Illegal to Shoulder By The ATF

    Quote Originally Posted by jpmuscle View Post
    So the established case law and earlier precedent they overlooked when formulating their previous opinion? I call BS about SIGs attorneys too but at any rate it's hearsay until something official comes out.
    Sig is covering their asses, they'll say the same as the ATF to continue selling it.

    They know what it is and how it's being used, and how it'll continue to be used but it takes the responsibility off them. Yet unless you take pictures using it incorrectly, go anywhere public to shoot, or go on the local BATFE company picnic shoot, it'll be hard for them to nail you for using it incorrectly.

    If true, it's easy to see why they'll be on board with the BATFE.
    Last edited by JulyAZ; 12-29-14 at 22:33.

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    73
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jpmuscle View Post
    So the established case law and earlier precedent they overlooked when formulating their previous opinion? I call BS about SIGs attorneys too but at any rate it's hearsay until something official comes out.
    I cant find that case law anywhere. Has anybody been able to locate this case law precedent?

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OUTPOST 31
    Posts
    10,455
    Feedback Score
    30 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfeetz View Post
    I cant find that case law anywhere. Has anybody been able to locate this case law precedent?
    That's because I'm betting there is none.

    Maybe their just going to come out and say possession of a firearm suggests criminal intent because some crimes are committed with the aid of a firearm.
    “Answer The Bell...” J.W.

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    73
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jpmuscle View Post
    That's because I'm betting there is none.

    Maybe their just going to come out and say possession of a firearm suggests criminal intent because some crimes are committed with the aid of a firearm.
    There may be a bright side to this. This logic by the ATF should render any SBR a Pistol if I never shoulder the stock.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,870
    Feedback Score
    25 (100%)
    Sure does fit the precedent of other ATF absurdities, like illegally stockpiling Chore Boy because it could be used to manufacture an unregistered suppressor...

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    SWMT
    Posts
    8,165
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    Seems like an ATF decision. Goes up there with the decision that a VFG is fine on a pistol, so long as it's OAL is at least 26 inches and it isn't being concealed.
    " Nil desperandum - Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it. "
    - Samuel Adams -

Page 21 of 54 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •