New ATF guidance on SB15 braces.

[elsquid]

Saw this posted over at calguns, thought I'd propagate the knowledge here:

"open_letter_on_the_redesign_of_stabilizing_braces"

http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/open_letter_on_the_redesign_of_stabilizing_braces. pdf

The core info:


The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock,
and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor
has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary
to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.

-- Michael

[jetfire]

I want to be mad at the ATF for this. But I can't. I'm mad at the idiots who wrote all those "mother may I" letters about putting SB15s on Glocks and shotguns that clearly intended to end-run the NFA.

More thoughts here (http://www.gunnuts.net/2015/01/16/breaking-atf-kills-the-sig-sb15-brace/).

[5pins]

Well that sucks.

[JHC]

Am I also redesigning a Vltor if I put it on an AR pistol but only to balance it for SHO shooting? (Hat tip Mark ;) )

[Edwin]

I'm still surprised this was approved in the first place.

[TR675]

Well, they haven't killed it. If you possess it and use it as an arm brace, you're fine. Meaning, if the local 5-0 catch you in possession of a sig-brace attached pistol but without a tax stamp, you aren't automatically going to face criminal charges for possessing an SBR. They're going to have to prove that you "remade" or "redesigned" the brace as a stock.

Meaning - not that I'm anyone's lawyer or anything - that maybe people should exercise discretion about taking and posting pictures of themselves shooting their "pistols" from their shoulders.

[gtmtnbiker98]

Thank all the dumbasses on YouTube and to all that sent in letters asking for further clarification(s).

[LittleLebowski]

I predict CAA saddle (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001T6HOQC/) sales to skyrocket :D

[Lester Polfus]

Where did I put that six pack of "I Told You So Stout?"

[BWT]

Stocks are on rifles. If you ask the ATF to approve your usage of something that is a brace as a stock; they're going to say that's a rifle. However, if it's a brace and you use it; sometimes from the shoulder. There's no restrictions on how to fire a pistol. But the moment you say it's a stock and ask to use it as a stock; it's over.

If you ask them can you set a firearm to shoot more than one bullet with one pull of the trigger. That's a machine gun.

They asked the ATF if this could be used as a stock and of course they said No. They have no choice.

[jetfire]

I predict CAA saddle (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001T6HOQC/) sales to skyrocket :D

All of 5 minutes after I read the ruling. :D

[LHS]

This opens up a whole new can of worms, though. If usage counts as 'redesigning' a weapon, does using two hands on a pistol then redesign it as an AOW?

[Tamara]

This opens up a whole new can of worms, though. If usage counts as 'redesigning' a weapon, does using two hands on a pistol then redesign it as an AOW?

There's a judicial ruling looming in the distance, but some poor bastige is gonna get ground in the gears to make it happen.

The NFA is extraordinarily poorly-written law, and the Swiss-cheesing it took to make it pass only made it more attackable. The right straw hasn't been put on the camel's back yet.

Machine guns and suppressors will hold and require legislative remedies, but the SBR/SBS regs are an artifact of an earlier version of the legislation that was elided. They're standing on air.

[joshs]

I want to be mad at the ATF for this. But I can't. I'm mad at the idiots who wrote all those "mother may I" letters about putting SB15s on Glocks and shotguns that clearly intended to end-run the NFA.

More thoughts here (http://www.gunnuts.net/2015/01/16/breaking-atf-kills-the-sig-sb15-brace/).

I'm pretty sure it had a lot more to do with someone at ATF making a mistake, from their point of view, last spring and the agency taking too long of a time in figuring how to walk it back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2

[LHS]

I'm pretty sure it had a lot more to do with someone at ATF making a mistake, from their point of view, last spring and the agency taking too long of a time in figuring how to walk it back.


Yup. The needle of "But but... they got around one of our laws and now they can easily get GUNS!" versus "But but... Americans with Disabilities Act!" took a while to thread.

[LHS]

I'd better go register aow-forum.com. :cool:


Sounds like a plan...

[Lester Polfus]

I figured this would happen eventually. My two favorite scenarios were 1) Somebody committing a mass shooting with a Sig-brace equipped blaster, thus igniting screams about the "machine gun loophole*" or 2) one of Bloomberg's cronies seeing one too many youtube videos of people bragging about how how they were getting around the NFA with the Sig-Brace, thus igniting screams about the "machine gun loophole."

Instead it sounds like everybody asked the ATF "mother may I" one too many times, and some body noticed. I think they are regretting this decision and their decision that "it's not a stock unless you use it as a stock" as the equivalent of closing their eyes, putting their hands over their ears and saying "lalalalalalalala" in the hopes the problem will go away.

I'd imagine there was a discussion on reversing their position on the arm braces entirely and ruling the whole thing in violation of the NFA. The only time I can think of where something similar happened was back in either the late 80's or early 90's where they deemed certain shotguns were "destructive devices" after all. The difference here is not very many Streetsweepers and such were sold, and it probably didn't take very much overtime to follow the paper trails on those guns to account for all of them.

I don't know how many of these Sig-brace equipped guns have been assembled and sold, but I'm guessing it's way too many to effectively control, and instead of pissing off a few dozen people, it would go well into the tens of thousands, so it would be very difficult to handle quietly, so the question would get asked why they allowed the "Machine Gun Loophole" in the first place.

Interesting times. Like I've said before, I wouldn't get caught in a youtube video firing one from the shoulder.


* I know there are no actual machineguns involved here, but the other side wouldn't find that "The Short Barreled Rifle Loophole" had quite the same ring to it.

[PPGMD]

I'd imagine there was a discussion on reversing their position on the arm braces entirely and ruling the whole thing in violation of the NFA. The only time I can think of where something similar happened was back in either the late 80's or early 90's where they deemed certain shotguns were "destructive devices" after all. The difference here is not very many Streetsweepers and such were sold, and it probably didn't take very much overtime to follow the paper trails on those guns to account for all of them.

Well that, and Sig has shown the willingness to call the ATF on their BS.

[Lester Polfus]

Well that, and Sig has shown the willingness to call the ATF on their BS.

That's a fair point. The gun industry is much more willing to put their knife in the ground and fight than they were back in the bad old days when most of the mainstream gun companies bent over for the assault weapons ban and such. Now EVERYBODY has a piece of the black rifle pie.

Really, it's in both Sigs and the ATFs best interest to not let this blow up into a Thing. Sig has many dollars at stack, and the ATF would like to avoid another round of public flogging. I think what will really screw the pooch is if the Anti's jump in on this one.

[Hambo]

From Moneyball: "When you get the answer you're looking for, hang up."

[PPGMD]

That's a fair point. The gun industry is much more willing to put their knife in the ground and fight than they were back in the bad old days when most of the mainstream gun companies bent over for the assault weapons ban and such. Now EVERYBODY has a piece of the black rifle pie.

I think the post-Heller legal landscape changed things. Before that court case it was "Mother may I."

So instead of having to argue why they should be allowed to make something, the government has to argue why it should be banned. That totally changes the legal landscape.

[Suvorov]

What a pisser.....

And prosecution is being brought against some local turds in Kalifornia for possessing SBRs (AKA Sig Brace) thus "violating" Kalifornia's SBR language.

https://www.turlockcitynews.com/crime/item/4515-ceres-swat-aids-in-the-arrest-of-three-for-turlock-home-invasion

[Byron]

Weeeelp..... I don't think that's the test case anyone in the gun-rights movement wants to take in challenging the classification of a SB15 pistol as an SBR.

[Suvorov]

Weeeelp..... I don't think that's the test case anyone in the gun-rights movement wants to take in challenging the classification of a SB15 pistol as an SBR.

Nope! :(

[joshs]

Weeeelp..... I don't think that's the test case anyone in the gun-rights movement wants to take in challenging the classification of a SB15 pistol as an SBR.

From the story, it seems like he is probably being charged under state law. Even if a California court decides that an SB15 is a stock, that wouldn't have any precedential value in a prosecution for violation of the NFA.

[5pins]

SIG Responds to ATF Brace Ruling.

http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/breaking-sig-responds-to-atf-brace-ruling-will-take-action/

[Suvorov]

From the story, it seems like he is probably being charged under state law. Even if a California court decides that an SB15 is a stock, that wouldn't have any precedential value in a prosecution for violation of the NFA.

From the info on CalGuns it appears the issue isn't the brace but the fact that the receiver was a rifle receiver. So it looks like this wasn't the case "they" were looking for either (thankfully).

[John Ralston]

So...I guess if you fire this pistol in the same manner you have an SBR too?

http://www.rossiusa.com/images/imagesMain/Ranch_Hand_2.jpg

[Suvorov]

So...I guess if you fire this pistol in the same manner you have an SBR too?

http://www.rossiusa.com/images/imagesMain/Ranch_Hand_2.jpg

It MAGICALLY becomes a rifle!

[Byron]

SIG Responds to ATF Brace Ruling.

http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/breaking-sig-responds-to-atf-brace-ruling-will-take-action/

I love this new age of the gun rights movement. I was only 11 when the '94 AWB went into place, with a number of companies throwing themselves at the feet of the government for mercy. That became my firearm "reality." I figured that's the way things would always be... or they'd keep getting worse.

Now I'm living in an age where gun companies are willing to go toe-to-toe with the federal government to illustrate the ridiculousness of federal firearm laws.

We've come a long way, baby.

[Tamara]

The more I look at this, the more I wonder if we don't have a bigger fifth column in Tech Branch than I thought. I mean, if I were going to try to get the SBR/SBS portion of the NFA torpedoed, this is pretty much how I'd start going about it.

[joshs]

The more I look at this, the more I wonder if we don't have a bigger fifth column in Tech Branch than I thought. I mean, if I were going to try to get the SBR/SBS portion of the NFA torpedoed, this is pretty much how I'd start going about it.

How? While the new "open letter" is pretty weak as far as statutory interpretation goes, what facial challenge to the SBR/SBS portions of the NFA do you think would be likely to succeed in federal court?

I think BATFE was really looking for a way to walk-back the private letter from last spring without simply saying they were wrong in their original interpretation and braces, cheek things, and other stock-like devices are intended to be fired from the shoulder. This would have drawn serious heat from Congress, so they needed a way to stop the NFA end run without making a whole lot of otherwise law-abiding people into felons overnight.

[Tamara]

How? While the new "open letter" is pretty weak as far as statutory interpretation goes, what facial challenge to the SBR/SBS portions of the NFA do you think would be likely to succeed in federal court?

The more "Mare's Legs" and SIG brace pistols on the market, combined with the surge in popularity of Form 1 SBRs... Could something not be done leveraging off the "common use" language of Heller, especially given the legislative background regarding why short rifles and shotguns are "firearms" under NFA '34 in the first place but handguns are not?

[joshs]

The more "Mare's Legs" and SIG brace pistols on the market, combined with the surge in popularity of Form 1 SBRs... Could something not be done leveraging off the "common use" language of Heller, especially given the legislative background regarding why short rifles and shotguns are "firearms" under NFA '34 in the first place but handguns are not?

The numbers are still extremely small compared to the numbers of "AWs", and we are having a very difficult time winning on the AW issue in federal court. The other problem is that the NFA is not a ban, it's a tax. The way most court's are applying Heller is using a burden analysis, which makes it much more difficult to win on things that are shy of an outright ban.

[Chuck Haggard]

I'd trade the Feds new machine guns and DDs, with a $1000 tax stamp, for turning SBRs and SBSs into just being rifles and shotguns and be rather happy about it.

There are things like the old "Game Getter" that are REALLY useful to own, but retarded rules get in the way.

[Tamara]

Ugh. So it's back to long-shot legislative remedies for the nonce, then?

At least the national organization is getting behind us on SB 433 here in Indiana (although they're also supporting the constitutional amendment for the right to hunt and fish, while leaving the state organization swinging on HB 1143, HB 1144, and HB 1244. I understand that hunting and fishing is under such extreme peril here in the heartland that the national organization would be moved to spend their limited capital on it at the expense of Constitutional Carry, carry on state property, and civil remedies against businesses who ban carry, but dang, it stings a bit at that.)

[GJM]

Looking for clarification on what you can and can not do with an AR pistol. Consider the example of an AAC .300 complete AR pistol, no more Sig brace, with an Aimpoint and BUIS, and just a foam cover on the tube.

To aim it, you look through the Aimpoint, which requires your face to be in a similar position as with a stock. You try to push forward with your support hand to keep the tube from hitting your shoulder -- as the tube is uncomfortable in recoil. Your intention is to aim, while not inflicting pain on your shoulder. All OK considering the latest BATF letter?

[Tamara]

The snarky answer, of course, would be that if you accidentally let the receiver extension touch your shoulder, you've made an SBR, and so the BATFEIEIO should arrest you.

This further, of course, opens up the possibility of a BATFEIEIO agent walking up to a regular Type 01's table at a gun show, picking up an AR pistol with a SIG brace on it, touching it to his shoulder (which, according to law, or at least regulation, is where the philosopher's stone that transmutes items from Title 1 to Title 2 resides) and then arresting the dealer for not having an SOT stamp.

Conversely, by the black letter of what is written, I guess it's still okay to shoot a SIG brace pistol (or Mare's Leg or regular AR pistol) off your centerline so long as it doesn't touch your shoulder. Not sure of the specific legal definition of "shoulder", though.

See? To my lay perspective, the whole thing's a frustratingly vague soup sandwich in dire need of reform.

[Clusterfrack]

I agree, Tamara. Taking your point further, would shouldering a Glock turn it permanently into an SBR?

[Seven_Sicks_Two]

I agree, Tamara. Taking your point further, would shouldering a Glock turn it permanently into an SBR?

Prior to the new ruling I used use this line on my customers that were interested in brace-equipped ARs that were nervous about shouldering it...

"I could take a Glock and press the back of the grip into my shoulder and pull the trigger... it would make me stupid, but it wouldn't make my Glock an SBR."

Sadly, this is apparently no longer true.

[Mino]

So, if I shoulder a buffer tube, does it become a stock? Puh-lease!! Something has to be done about this NFA cr@p. What's next, banning ammunition because the Second Amendment doesn't mention it? What never ceases to amaze me is how all these gun rights people turn into submissive wussies whenever something like this happens. Everyone says "...from my cold, dead hands!" and when the government says "jump" we ask "how high?"

[LittleLebowski]

So, if I shoulder a buffer tube, does it become a stock? Puh-lease!! Something has to be done about this NFA cr@p. What's next, banning ammunition because the Second Amendment doesn't mention it? What never ceases to amaze me is how all these gun rights people turn into submissive wussies whenever something like this happens. Everyone says "...from my cold, dead hands!" and when the government says "jump" we ask "how high?"

I guess that some of us put families and careers ahead of shouldering an AR pistol.

[Aray]

I guess that some of us put families and careers ahead of shouldering an AR pistol.

Priorities? Pfffft. This is the internet.

[Beat Trash]

Priorities? Pfffft. This is the internet.

That is the unwritten motto of just about every gun forum on the internet!

[Tamara]

So, if I shoulder a buffer tube, does it become a stock? Puh-lease!! Something has to be done about this NFA cr@p. What's next, banning ammunition because the Second Amendment doesn't mention it? What never ceases to amaze me is how all these gun rights people turn into submissive wussies whenever something like this happens. Everyone says "...from my cold, dead hands!" and when the government says "jump" we ask "how high?"

Tell you what, I'll gladly contribute to the GoFundMe for your defense fund...

[LittleLebowski]

Tell you what, I'll gladly contribute to the GoFundMe for your defense fund...

Me too.

[MichaelD]

I'll contribute as well if someone wants to be the test case.

[jetfire]

I guess that some of us put families and careers ahead of shouldering an AR pistol.

The gunternet: where everything is an ideological purity test to see who can be the most Pro-2A, and if you fail then you're cast into outer darkness.

The general lack of that kind of idiocy is why I like this forum.

[MichaelD]

^ I'll second that. ^

[BWT]

The gunternet: where everything is an ideological purity test to see who can be the most Pro-2A, and if you fail then you're cast into outer darkness.

The general lack of that kind of idiocy is why I like this forum.

I know, I know. I might get an eye roll but Proverbs 16:18 "Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall". I've seen a ton of bad ideas happen because of "you're too scared", "aren't you a man?", etc.

The truth is there is a line that the Government can cross but it may cost you everything to stand up for those things.

Is the SIG arm brace worth it? Long story short, years ago there was a guy on silencer talk convicted of having unregistered machine guns.

Was it worth it? I dunno, but I do know he is still struggling to get a job still because of his record (which is otherwise spotless).

What's it worth?

ETA: He was a collector (no one knew of unregistered MG's); it wasn't a publicity stunt.

[Dagga Boy]

So all of a sudden the stupidity of running an AUG instead of a 10.5" AR with a brace may not be so dumb....I guess I don't get a "GoFund Me", or whatever.

[LittleLebowski]

So all of a sudden the stupidity of running an AUG instead of a 10.5" AR with a brace may not be so dumb....I guess I don't get a "GoFund Me", or whatever.

34 day turn around on SBRs :cool:

[Dagga Boy]

34 day turn around on SBRs :cool:

Shot mine in 5 different states in the last month........without permission:eek:

[ReverendMeat]

Even ignoring the NFA hassles, 16" barrel vs. 11" barrel with same OAL seems to be a benefit. Unless I've been lied to all my life and .223/5.56 is effective regardless of velocity.

[Failure2Stop]

So all of a sudden the stupidity of running an AUG instead of a 10.5" AR with a brace may not be so dumb....I guess I don't get a "GoFund Me", or whatever.

http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1123/11234230/2598400-7374753572-1e483.jpg
Smiley face.

[BWT]

K-var just became a distributor of all Steyr products.

http://www.k-var.com/shop/Other-Rifles/

ETA: Are you twisting people's arms at SHOT, nyeti?

[Dagga Boy]

K-var just became a distributor of all Steyr products.

http://www.k-var.com/shop/Other-Rifles/

ETA: Are you twisting people's arms at SHOT, nyeti?

We were......we'll have an announcement soon.......