|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Except I didn't. I noted exceptions for those who live in ban states and by extension have other practical restrictions.
But everyone here knows exactly who and what I'm talking about. There is no need to try and make it seem like I said anything more or distort what I said. You guys will rip somebody for a SERPA holster for 20 pages but we can't talk about the many limitations of a SIG brace firearm?!?
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
This is what I'm thinking. It's a clear case of directly contradictory opinions coming out of the BATFE within a few years of each other. If anything, it weakens the position of the BATFE all around, by exposing the fact that issued opinions are arbitrary, onerous and subject to change within a short period of time.
Is anyone really surprised by this? Come on, we all know this has been a verbal game since they first commented on the SIG brace.
The AR15 "pistol" is not a pistol, everyone has always known that.
The "brace" was never really intended only to be a "brace" but clear was designed to be a should stock as well.
So finally the ATF has ruled what anyone with an ounce of common sense has been expecting: Hey, if you are using that "brace" to shoulder your "pistol" ... guess what, it ain't a pistol, it's a rifle now.
The sad thing, assuming this letter is the ATF's latest word on this. is that there are a heck of a lot of people now financially invested in the whole "AR pistol" thing, all based on the "forearm brace" game that has been played for the past couple of years.
Here's my shocked face:
![]()
Last edited by JHG556; 12-27-14 at 11:08.
The ATF has gone over the top with including potential use in classifying NFA firearms. This potentially affects all gun owners and the silly "you should have seen this coming" VS "you are an SBR snob" is just Internet stupidity and a waste of time.
The fact is the ATF issued an opinion to the inventor, Alex Bosco, that his brace (that ultimately became the SB-15) is not a butt stock and does not change the classification of an AR pistol to an NFA firearm. Sgt. Bradley asked for an opinion on the legality of shouldering an AR-15 pistol. As far as I can tell, that was the entirity of his question and he wasn't asking as an interested shooter of shouldered pistols, but as a police officer and enforcer of laws. It appears to me that the famous response to "Sgt. Bradley" volunteered information about the "Sig Stability Brace" with a statement that accessories like it do not change the classification either, even if they are misused, i.e. shouldered.
Now, the same Max Kingery who signed the Bradley letter signed a more recent opinion that using the Sig Brace "like a stock" instantly makes that pistol into a rifle, even though the SB-15 is "not a stock" by their own determination. This is an important issue that needs to be resolved and the waters have become so polluted a lawsuit may be the only way it can happen.
If you walk into a room containing only an AR pistol with a Sig Brace (or Shockwave Blade, crutch tip, bare buffer tube, etc.), what is it? AR pistol or NFA SBR? If the way you pick it up changes the answer, then that is a problem. I hope Sig sues, even if the shouldering ban is upheld, so this dangerous mindset at the ATF is challenged, and hopefully stopped. How long before the Thordsen becomes their next target?
A full auto gun is an NFA item no matter how you use it. I would love to have an M-16 that is only an NFA item if I throw the selector to the "auto" position. If the SB-15 is not a stock, then letting them say that using it like a stock makes the pistol into a rifle (and NFA firearm if the barrel is < 16") needs to be stopped. I can live without Sig Braces but would like to still use them so I support a lawsuit to resolve these convoluted opinions once and for all, whichever way it goes.
What will the Internet forums talk about if this is resolved clearly, in court, with no room for interpretation?![]()
Last edited by DWood; 12-27-14 at 12:19.
Go in peace, but be prepared for violence.
Bookmarks