BATFE reverses itself again re: shouldering pistol braces

[BillSWPA]

My question is why?? Because they are going to lose out on $200 in taxes? Because it really presents an issue with the safety of the citizens of this country? There are bigger gun issues in this country when it comes to firearms, and making an issue with shortening the barrel of a rifle or putting a stock on a pistol is a silly law. Whenever I explain the issue with a new gun owner they look at me like I just stepped off a UFO.

The first thing I say when discussing gun control is not to expect it to make sense. Gun control laws are written by people who neither like nor understand guns. So, expecting them to make sense will only prove to be an obstacle to correctly understanding the legal requirements.

[medic15al]

Question: Is it the same when someone shoulders the bare pistol buffer tube? Is it treated in the same manor?

[ssb]

Question: Is it the same when someone shoulders the bare pistol buffer tube? Is it treated in the same manor?

I would think that, since the buffer tube is a component required for an AR-15 pistol to function rather than a part added later to "make the pistol easier to shoot as a pistol," there's no re-design or manufacture occurring. The back-and-forth with the SigBraces involves manufacturing an NFA firearm by way of adding a new part. However, I don't work for the ATF's FTB and don't pretend to understand what goes on inside their heads.

[NH Shooter]

Question: Is it the same when someone shoulders the bare pistol buffer tube? Is it treated in the same manor?

Not is the tube is so damned short that your nose ends up in the rear sight;










With a 2-point sling there is about zero reason to shoulder it anyway.

[entropy]

Using 20rd mags makes the whole thing work....

[GuanoLoco]

Not is the tube is so damned short that your nose ends up in the rear sight;










With a 2-point sling there is about zero reason to shoulder it anyway.

Are you fond of that paint job?

[NH Shooter]

are you fond of that paint job?

for illustration purposes only. No paint jobs were injured in the taking of this photo.

[NH Shooter]

you put a "brace" on your "pistol" to try and get around having to comply with the law for an SBR and then try to deny that this is, in fact, exactly what you're doing.

Though I have no data to back the assertion, I suspect 0.09% of those who install a brace actually use it the way it was intended and approved for use by the King's Men (single handed with the brace strapped to the forearm).

[Sensei]

The case of U.S. v. Wright (3:18-CR-16) should give everyone using a pistol brace some pause.


Here is the Cliff’s Notes version:
1) Mr. Wright added Maxim CQB Pistol AR 15 PDW brace, Stark Express angled foregrip, and a flash suppressor to his The Jack AR-15 pistol (7.75” barrel). Of note, all of these products have been deemed as in compliance with the NFA by previous BATF memoranda.

2) He was arrested by the BATF and prosecuted by the US Attorney Office for the Northern District of OH for having an unregistered SBR.

3) During the trial, the prosecution attemped to suppress the previous BATF memoranda regarding the compliance of pistol stabilizing braces.

4) The defendant was acquitted after incurring legal fees in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Bottom line, if you choose to put these on your pistol, the government can and prosecute you and they will attempt to keep the jury from ever knowing that they told you it was OK to use them. Fortunately, Mr. Wright provided a great case precedent for your acquittal, but be sure to have a rainy day fund for your legal expenses..

[einherjarvalk]

Evidently this is where the ATF tried to nail him to the wall - at the tip of his Maxim cheek rest was a rubber cane tip.

I can see why he was aquitted, but still, this is ridiculous.



Also, here's the full gun in case anyone wants to have their lunch come back out the way it came today.