For goodness sakes DON'T shoulder your Sig Brace...

[Gaspipeshooter]

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

[toolboxluis00200]

is this new ??

[Ride4frnt]

From today

[UWone77]

However, ATF has received numerous inquiries regarding alternate uses for this device, including use as a shoulder stock.

Explains it all for me ....

[gatordev]

Explains it all for me ....

Exactly. People were worried that this was not okay, even though it was said to be okay. So they kept asking if it was okay until finally they're told it's not okay. Mission accomplished.

[Ride4frnt]

Sold my brace AND now I can't get a SBR approved. Shaking my head.

[toolboxluis00200]

and this is why I never got one

[toolboxluis00200]

Sold my brace AND now I can't get a SBR approved. Shaking my head.

before i got my SBR i use to just use the tube and it was not that bad so i think you be ok for now

[Ride4frnt]

before i got my SBR i use to just use the tube and it was not that bad so i think you be ok for now

Oh I know. I didn't want the brace that's why I sold it.

[Ordnance]

Explains it all for me ....

Why we can't have nice things, lol. Don't tell me you're surprised though. It's the ATF... they change their mind 8+ times before deciding what to eat for lunch.

[Ordnance]

before i got my SBR i use to just use the tube....

Shhhh... or they'll make shouldering a buffer tube illegal also... lol

[UWone77]

If you're asking the ATF to use a Sig Brace as a shouldering Stock... well as they say, ask stupid questions, you get a stupid answer.

[KW900A]

Facebook is lit up with this right now

[camomike]

This was a long time coming. Don't poke the bear.

[JHoward]

I think the fact that they put buffer tubes on everything in the world to add a Sig brace probably didn't help. Oh well, I have a Thordsen, it's only good for a cheek rest.

[mustangfreek]

and this is why I never got one

Me also..and cause they looked kinda funky

[CarbonScoring]

Oh well, I have a Thordsen, it's only good for a cheek rest.

Is it? I better go ask the ATF for clarification.

[Thompson]

well as they say, ask stupid questions, you get a stupid answer.
My good friend Forest once said "Stupid is as stupid does" :(

[toolboxluis00200]

Shhhh... or they'll make shouldering a buffer tube illegal also... lol

i don't shoulder it.................. from time to time it mite show up ther

[toolboxluis00200]

Me also..and cause they looked kinda funky

i kind of like it it just that i saw this coming a mile a way

[eldogg]

well, my stamp came today. no worries............

[Dstrbdmedic167]

well, my stamp came today. no worries............

Congrats!!

[toolboxluis00200]

well, my stamp came today. no worries............

very cool

[FortTom]

Exactly. People were worried that this was not okay, even though it was said to be okay. So they kept asking if it was okay until finally they're told it's not okay. Mission accomplished.


If you're asking the ATF to use a Sig Brace as a shouldering Stock... well as they say, ask stupid questions, you get a stupid answer.


This was a long time coming. Don't poke the bear.

I swear when I see this kind of thing, I can't help to blame the shooting community itself. Don't poke the damn bear, is right. ATF makes a ruling, and someone has to see just how far they can push it, before they can bring the law tumbling down on everyone else. Hell, I saw this coming down quite a while ago. I've NEVER seen anyone use the damn thing for anything else other than a stock. We (KY) probably have some of the most liberal gun laws in the nation, and there was already murmuring among law enforcement and range officers, because the law was a bit vague, and there is always one MF with a big mouth who's got to brag at the top of his lungs, to everyone who'll listen, how he got around the SBR regulations.[bash]

[GOST]

They on sale yet?

[Dstrbdmedic167]

They on sale yet?

Yea I wonder how cheap I could get one now :crazy: I do feel somewhat sorry for the fools, I mean people, that have them "intention" or not it'll be hard to sell them now Imo...

[Gaspipeshooter]

Yea I wonder how cheap I could get one now :crazy: I do feel somewhat sorry for the fools, I mean people, that have them "intention" or not it'll be hard to sell them now Imo...

I guess I'm one of those fools...but I bought mine never intending to sell it. They aren't outlawed, just don't be posting friggin' pictures on the Internet of yourself shouldering it...

[Dstrbdmedic167]

I guess I'm one of those fools...but I bought mine never intending to sell it. They aren't outlawed, just don't be posting friggin' pictures on the Internet of yourself shouldering it...

No disrespect to anyone that does have one. But it's not like we didn't know this was coming... I had one but it was very temp.. I knew I was gonna SBR but wanted to see the fuss..

[Gaspipeshooter]

No disrespect to anyone that does have one. But it's not like we didn't know this was coming... I had one but it was very temp.. I knew I was gonna SBR but wanted to see the fuss..

I fully expected with all the folks out there posting "selfies" on their Facebook pages using them in a way for which they weren't "designed/intended" for it was gonna happen. Pistols have certain legal advantages over SBRs, which is exactly why I have one.

[Dstrbdmedic167]

I fully expected with all the folks out there posting "selfies" on their Facebook pages using them in a way for which they weren't "designed/intended" for it was gonna happen. Pistols have certain legal advantages over SBRs, which is exactly why I have one.

Yea it's nice not to fill out a form to carry it out of state but I don't go OOS with my firearms enough to worry. Plus if you call and tell them you have a quick unexpected trip you can have one approved that day.

[Uffdaphil]

I blame the pussification of the American electorate for allowing our representatives at all levels of government to get away with delegating so much ambiguous power to bureaucrats so the pols can tsk, tsk and claim they are not responsible. It's even worse at state levels with appointed councils and their programs of "smart growth", and social leveling. But at least we can flee an oppressive state.

This capricious, logic defying ruling should provoke outrage whether one likes the brace or not. I want my NRA dues and other 2A group contributions put to use fighting the very idea that the law can change with each new ass in an executives seat.

[Stone]

In all reality what's changed? It wasn't legal to shoulder it before and its still illegal now. If people think the atf didn't realize folks were using it that way then you are mistaken. Just because you ignore something doesn't mean its not there...[bash]

[WHSmithIV]

I swear when I see this kind of thing, I can't help to blame the shooting community itself. Don't poke the damn bear, is right. ATF makes a ruling, and someone has to see just how far they can push it, before they can bring the law tumbling down on everyone else. Hell, I saw this coming down quite a while ago. I've NEVER seen anyone use the damn thing for anything else other than a stock. We (KY) probably have some of the most liberal gun laws in the nation, and there was already murmuring among law enforcement and range officers, because the law was a bit vague, and there is always one MF with a big mouth who's got to brag at the top of his lungs, to everyone who'll listen, how he got around the SBR regulations.[bash]

The biggest problem was all the numbskulls who, instead of just reading the ATF ruling on them to begin with, kept on sending ATF letters ASKING them if it was OK... duhhh, ATF made a statement saying it was not OK but obviously people could end up misusing the product. The ATF ruling was, and still is, valid for it's intended use - i.e. strap it to your arm. Now they're saying though that if some dummy puts it on a pistol to USE it as a shoulder stock and misuses it as such, then it has been "re-designed" from it's original purpose (even though nothing on the brace has been modified at all) - and therefore makes the weapon now a SBR. I even saw one letter where the idiot sent ATF his complete intended parts list - including the SIG Brace to ask them if it was legal to build the pistol that way and shoulder the weapon with the brace. I also figured this kind of ruling would eventually get sent out because of the number of stupid letters ATF kept getting.

Glad I had already decided I wasn't going to bother with one. I have a feeling we'll start to see a lot of them showing up cheap on fleabay too.

[Naytwan]

The biggest problem was all the numbskulls who, instead of just reading the ATF ruling on them to begin with, kept on sending ATF letters ASKING them if it was OK... duhhh, ATF made a statement saying it was not OK but obviously people could end up misusing the product. The ATF ruling was, and still is, valid for it's intended use - i.e. strap it to your arm. Now they're saying though that if some dummy puts it on a pistol to USE it as a shoulder stock and misuses it as such, then it has been "re-designed" from it's original purpose (even though nothing on the brace has been modified at all) - and therefore makes the weapon now a SBR. I even saw one letter where the idiot sent ATF his complete intended parts list - including the SIG Brace to ask them if it was legal to build the pistol that way and shoulder the weapon with the brace. I also figured this kind of ruling would eventually get sent out because of the number of stupid letters ATF kept getting.

Glad I had already decided I wasn't going to bother with one. I have a feeling we'll start to see a lot of them showing up cheap on fleabay too.

I saw one where the guy stated he wanted an SBR. So dumb.

[Deadwing]

If you're asking the ATF to use a Sig Brace as a shouldering Stock... well as they say, ask stupid questions, you get a stupid answer.

There are no stupid questions, only inquisitive idiots. :P

Didn't Sig ship them with copies of an ATF opinion letter stating improper use of an accessory doesn't change a weapon's classification? After reading that, i'd STFU and shoot.

[206thsense]

There are no stupid questions, only inquisitive idiots. :P

Didn't Sig ship them with copies of an ATF opinion letter stating improper use of an accessory doesn't change a weapon's classification? After reading that, i'd STFU and shoot.

Yep, but as other people mentioned... they couldn't leave well enough alone. I wonder if SIG will take the ATF to court over the re-classification of the brace.

Too bad all my braces will be lost in a tragic boating accident... :)

[Deadwing]

Yep, but as other people mentioned... they couldn't leave well enough alone. I wonder if SIG will take the ATF to court over the re-classification of the brace.

Too bad all my braces will be lost in a tragic boating accident... :)

Yeah, a boating accident… That's the ticket… :P

[WHSmithIV]

I suppose if they start showing up used on fleabay for $20 bucks I'll get one. Not to actually mount it on my pistol, but to have it in case one of my arms ever becomes incapacitated enough to need to strap it to my wrist - or if that happens to someone I know. As UWone and some others have so succinctly pointed out, they are apparently shitty as butt stocks anyway.

(edited for a spelling error - which pretty much ALL of my editing is for - I simply type too fast)

[DutyUse]

well, my stamp came today. no worries............

Grats bro. I got stamp envy atm

[UWone77]

This thread makes me want to submit another Form 1.

I'm thinking a LMT Defender lower for this MRP 10.5

Or a BCM for that 11.5

Sig Braces... Lame since 2012.

[WHSmithIV]

This thread makes me want to submit another Form 1.

I'm thinking a LMT Defender lower for this MRP 10.5

Or a BCM for that 11.5

Sig Braces... Lame since 2012.

Do it UWone - I'm going to do it with setting up a NFA trust first. There just may be an elderly friend of mine leaving me a couple of perfectly legal machine guns that just need a tax stamp transfer within the next 10 years or so.

[WHSmithIV]

I have this nasty, stinking, feeling that tax stamps are going to eventually get adjusted and that new trusts will somehow be illegal.... existing trusts 'maybe' grandfathered in. No guarantee though.

There are no limits that a government bent on having absolute power will go to. The 2nd Amendment and the number of arms in private hands is the only thing preventing the government from doing so now though. There aren't anywhere near enough states that would vote to change the Constitution for repealing the 2nd Amendment. So, when the government wants to ban or restrict firearms, it is going to do so as far as it can for as long as it can. The Constitution does keep getting in the way of that desire though.

I think I better stop now. We try to keep politics out of WEVO.

[UWone77]

I have this nasty, stinking, feeling that tax stamps are going to eventually get adjusted and that new trusts will somehow be illegal.... existing trusts 'maybe' grandfathered in. No guarantee though.

There are no limits that a government bent on having absolute power will go to. The 2nd Amendment and the number of arms in private hands is the only thing preventing the government from doing so now though. There aren't anywhere near enough states that would vote to change the Constitution for repealing the 2nd Amendment. So, when the government wants to ban or restrict firearms, it is going to do so as far as it can for as long as it can. The Constitution does keep getting in the way of that desire though.

I think I better stop now. We try to keep politics out of WEVO.

41P... People seem to forget that, it's looming for this summer.

I can completely envision a scenario where there are no more tax stamps issued to trusts as soon as later this year.

If you want an NFA item, I'd get on it ASAP.

[Deadwing]

41P... People seem to forget that, it's looming for this summer.

I can completely envision a scenario where there are no more tax stamps issued to trusts as soon as later this year.

If you want an NFA item, I'd get on it ASAP.

I haven't forgotten. I'm waiting on 3 Form 4s, and have half a mind to get another can and submit a few Form 1s on stripped lowers. Not to be the panicky type, but how many times can we dodge that 41P bullet and hope it will be pushed back yet again?

[WHSmithIV]

41P... People seem to forget that, it's looming for this summer.

I can completely envision a scenario where there are no more tax stamps issued to trusts as soon as later this year.

If you want an NFA item, I'd get on it ASAP.

What's coming this summer? There must be something I haven't seen yet. I'll start looking it up. Any info you can provide will be helpful. The Supreme Court has already ruled that a trust is a company and not an individual. Granted, if they take up a new anti gun case and reverse that decision, everything could change. This now directly concerns me because I and my wife's very elderly friend has several perfectly legal fully auto machine guns with their tax stamps. he'd like to will them to us and he doesn't have very many more years to live. He has a LOT of guns, but his grown up kids aren't so savvy about guns. So, he wants to have us set up to get all the fully auto ones and leave the rest to his grown up children. Whether this will ever happen, I don't know for sure, but I think it will. If the laws change though, those machine guns may just have to have been thrown into the river next to his home.

Edit to add - if those machine guns get thrown into the very fast flowing river, I guess there will be an affidavit saying that that is what was done. maybe someone gets a small fine for polluting. This IS Idaho though. Guns in this state are pretty much sacrosanct.

I do have a collectors FFL type 3 license - Do you think they will still honor tax stamps for collectors?

[Deadwing]

What's coming this summer? There must be something I haven't seen yet. I'll start looking it up. Any info you can provide will be helpful. The Supreme Court has already ruled that a trust is a company and not an individual. Granted, if they take up a new anti gun case and reverse that decision, everything could change. This now directly concerns me because I and my wife's very elderly friend has several perfectly legal fully auto machine guns with their tax stamps. he'd like to will them to us and he doesn't have very many more years to live. He has a LOT of guns, but his grown up kids aren't so savvy about guns. So, he wants to have us set up to get all the fully auto ones and leave the rest to his grown up children. Whether this will ever happen, I don't know for sure, but I think it will. If the laws change though, those machine guns may just have to have been thrown into the river next to his home.

Edit to add - if those machine guns get thrown into the very fast flowing river, I guess there will be an affidavit saying that that is what was done. maybe someone gets a small fine for polluting. This IS Idaho though. Guns in this state are pretty much sacrosanct.

I do have a collectors FFL type 3 license - Do you think they will still honor tax stamps for collectors?

ATF 41P is what's coming…

http://www.nfafa.org/atf41p.cfm

Long and short of it, any individual named in a trust, for the purposes of procuring or making NFA items, will be subject to the same requirements as an individual person filing the same form(s). That means fingerprints, photographs, and CLEO sign-off for each person named in the trust.

The final rule making date has been pushed back a couple times already, and is now tentatively supposed to happen this coming May.

[FortTom]

I once posted somewhere, that I don't mess with NFA stuff anymore, because of all the hassles, and at least two people replied, what hassles?[bash][:D]

[Deadwing]

I once posted somewhere, that I don't mess with NFA stuff anymore, because of all the hassles, and at least two people replied, what hassles?[bash][:D]

LOL!!! What hassles? Oh, where to begin… [BD]

[mustangfreek]

41P... People seem to forget that, it's looming for this summer.

I can completely envision a scenario where there are no more tax stamps issued to trusts as soon as later this year.

If you want an NFA item, I'd get on it ASAP.


.....[bash]

[gatordev]

This thread makes me want to submit another Form 1.

I'm thinking a LMT Defender lower for this MRP 10.5

Or a BCM for that 11.5

Sig Braces... Lame since 2012.

Another AR? That's so passe. I have an idea for something else...

[UWone77]

Another AR? That's so passe. I have an idea for something else...

Easy enough to do an exisiting.

I strangely want a Kriss Vector SBR. Of course a MP5 as well, and possibly a MPX

[UWone77]

I once posted somewhere, that I don't mess with NFA stuff anymore, because of all the hassles, and at least two people replied, what hassles?[bash][:D]

You're such a drama queen. [:D]

[gatordev]

Didn't realize your LWRC pic was from a different thread...


Easy enough to do an exisiting.

Of course a MP5 as well...

Hmmm....that's a fantastic idea. Stay tuned....

[WHSmithIV]

ATF 41P is what's coming…

http://www.nfafa.org/atf41p.cfm

Long and short of it, any individual named in a trust, for the purposes of procuring or making NFA items, will be subject to the same requirements as an individual person filing the same form(s). That means fingerprints, photographs, and CLEO sign-off for each person named in the trust.

The final rule making date has been pushed back a couple times already, and is now tentatively supposed to happen this coming May.


I'm a veteran - my fingerprints were taken very long ago and are on file - photographs are on file too - I've had a US Passport for the last 40 years. If our local Sheriff needs to sign off on something, he'll do so, no problem. I know for a fact that my local Sheriff and our deputies would much prefer that those machine guns are here in our valley no matter what hoops we have to go through to get them here. If they do ever get here, they will stay in this valley for many years to come. I will give them to the deputy who I trust who is also good friend of mine when my time on Earth is over. I want to keep the guns protected and available to be used if ever needed. My kids can't do that job with them, but he can and most certainly will.

[Deadwing]

I'm a veteran - my fingerprints were taken very long ago and are on file - photographs are on file too - I've had a US Passport for the last 40 years. If our local Sheriff needs to sign off on something, he'll do so, no problem. I know for a fact that my local Sheriff and our deputies would much prefer that those machine guns are here in our valley no matter what hoops we have to go through to get them here. If they do ever get here, they will stay in this valley for many years to come. I will give them to the deputy who I trust who is also good friend of mine when my time on Earth is over. I want to keep the guns protected and available to be used if ever needed. My kids can't do that job with them, but he can and most certainly will.

I work for the Federal govt., have security clearance, have a passport, have a concealed carry permit, etc. so my photos and prints and everything about me is documented in some government file someplace. It's the CLEO sign-off that's a problem. I'd venture a guess that most of us aren't as fortunate as you to have a Sheriff, or police chief, or whatever it is your jurisdiction has, who is willing to sign off on a Form 1 or 4, and allow scary things like SBRs and silencers, much less machine guns, in "their town". And then to have to do that for each person named on the trust is even more of a pain. Trusts also help protect the disposition of your NFA items after your death. All this only serves to further erode our Second Amendment rights by basically having to ask permission of your CLEO to own an NFA item, and having the very real possibility that permission will be denied. And lets not forget that the NFA is already an infringement of our right to keep and bear arms. And anything that makes it more difficult, if not impossible, for me to exercise my natural and constitutionally protected rights tends to ruffle my feathers a bit.

[WHSmithIV]

I work for the Federal govt., have security clearance, have a passport, have a concealed carry permit, etc. so my photos and prints and everything about me is documented in some government file someplace. It's the CLEO sign-off that's a problem. I'd venture a guess that most of us aren't as fortunate as you to have a Sheriff, or police chief, or whatever it is your jurisdiction has, who is willing to sign off on a Form 1 or 4, and allow scary things like SBRs and silencers, much less machine guns, in "their town". And then to have to do that for each person named on the trust is even more of a pain. Trusts also help protect the disposition of your NFA items after your death. All this only serves to further erode our Second Amendment rights by basically having to ask permission of your CLEO to own an NFA item, and having the very real possibility that permission will be denied. And lets not forget that the NFA is already an infringement of our right to keep and bear arms. And anything that makes it more difficult, if not impossible, for me to exercise my natural and constitutionally protected rights tends to ruffle my feathers a bit.

I agree wholeheartedly. Fortunately though, this is Gun Friendly USA here in Idaho and our entire LEO force in the entire county is our one Sheriff and 3 deputies for a 2500+ square mile county. They are ALL very pro 2nd Amendment. I was going to set up a trust to get this done for when it happens, but this ATF 41P thing I didn't know about. So, I need to look this up. I wonder if the NRA will sue them for making an arbitrary change that would go against a Supreme Court ruling?

[WHSmithIV]

I just read through this 41P. Here in Idaho I know it would not be a problem to have our state legislature pass legislation requiring all CLEO's to process the forms. They do it anyway willingly and our state is one of the states that already has passed legislation that prohibits any LEO from assisting federal agents trying to take guns away from the population. Idaho has also passed legislation that states that no LEO's here are allowed to enforce any new regulations the federal government might dream up. You want a CCW here? - no problem. We are a 'shall issue' state. $25, background check (just like buying a gun to make sure you're not a felon) - they print up your CCW at the local Sheriff's dept. or police dept. and hand it to you. Every 5 years you go and renew it. I suspect that Idaho will soon follow Wyoming in making concealed carry in our state legal without a CCW. We can conceal carry 1) on our own property, 2) in our own business and 3) while out hunting - no CCW required.

I feel very sad for everyone living in the anti gun states. It very much pains me to see those states trampling all over the Constitution that I swore my very life to protect and defend as if the Constitution was a meaningless piece of toilet paper left on a floor somewhere. I suspect our once great country may very well break apart as the Soviet Union did into multiple countries. We've been seeing it happen already. The writing is already on the wall. Detroit is a microcosm of it.

[akersc]

Are you saying that Michigan is Anti Gun or we are like the Soviet Union? Are you sure you meant Detroit? I am just confused by your last comment.......
I feel very sad for everyone living in the anti gun states. It very much pains me to see those states trampling all over the Constitution that I swore my very life to protect and defend as if the Constitution was a meaningless piece of toilet paper left on a floor somewhere. I suspect our once great country may very well break apart as the Soviet Union did into multiple countries. We've been seeing it happen already. The writing is already on the wall. Detroit is a microcosm of it.

[Gaspipeshooter]

Here's an interesting take on the situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNBbXAoWRz0

[BoilerUp]

I just redesigned all my rifles by intending for them to only be shot with one hand and never shouldered.

I suggest you all do the same as it is very liberating.

[voodoo_man]

http://i.imgur.com/T8Hmuee.png

[UWone77]

Here's an interesting take on the situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNBbXAoWRz0

Looks like he's quite the user of said illegal drugs in his first example. [:D]

So far the ATF issued an opinion, not a ruling.

BUT even if this was enforceable, anyone willing to be the test case? [BD]

[voodoo_man]

Looks like he's quite the user of said illegal drugs in his first example. [:D]

So far the ATF issued an opinion, not a ruling.

BUT even if this was enforceable, anyone willing to be the test case? [BD]

Issue would be of intent, not design or redesign or rereredesign or whatever.

Can you prove intent? Depends on the person and the situation. Pictures and videos help of course.

[Gaspipeshooter]

Issue would be of intent, not design or redesign or rereredesign or whatever.

Can you prove intent? Depends on the person and the situation. Pictures and videos help of course.

Without making a physical modification/change, how is the way you hold it a "redesign"?

[toolboxluis00200]

Here's an interesting take on the situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNBbXAoWRz0

just came to post that

[voodoo_man]

Without making a physical modification/change, how is the way you hold it a "redesign"?

Dont look at it from your or our point of view. Look at it from the point of view of average joe and jane juror.

Do you think they will understand?

[Gaspipeshooter]

Dont look at it from your or our point of view. Look at it from the point of view of average joe and jane juror.

Do you think they will understand?

With the talent pool of jurors in today's society, I'd rather not take that chance!!!

[voodoo_man]

With the talent pool of jurors in today's society, I'd rather not take that chance!!!

Hence my statements of intent.

[Pyzik]

TherealTrippleB is awesome. Dude make's awesome videos.

My SB is staying on. I build a damn pistol not an SBR.

[Pyzik]

Dont look at it from your or our point of view. Look at it from the point of view of average joe and jane juror.

Do you think they will understand?

I am going to throw this out there. I talked with two "liberal" friend's over the last couple days and asked the hypothetical question (BEFORE bringing up the sig brace or guns)...
"If I use a fork to cut my food, did I redesign the fork into a knife?"
-no
"what if cut off two tines and sharpened the other two on opposing edges to make cutting easier?"
-yeah, sure you removed material and and altered it for another purpose (both gave almost the same answer).

"Okay, what if I put an arm brace on a pistol, designed to make it easier to shoot with one hand but instead of using it as intended I put it to my shoulder?"
-Hmmm... I don't know....
"I didn't change a SINGLE thing other than it's placement on my body."
-I don't think you can do that.

^^^Literally how both of them reacted...
When asked but WHY it mattered neither could give me a good answer.


http://www.se-world.info/wcf/images/smilies/smilie_wall.gif

[n4p226r]

I am going to throw this out there. I talked with two "liberal" friend's over the last couple days and asked the hypothetical question (BEFORE bringing up the sig brace or guns)...
"If I use a fork to cut my food, did I redesign the fork into a knife?"
-no
"what if cut off two tines and sharpened the other two on opposing edges to make cutting easier?"
-yeah, sure you removed material and and altered it for another purpose (both gave almost the same answer).

"Okay, what if I put an arm brace on a pistol, designed to make it easier to shoot with one hand but instead of using it as intended I put it to my shoulder?"
-Hmmm... I don't know....
"I didn't change a SINGLE thing other than it's placement on my body."
-I don't think you can do that.

^^^Literally how both of them reacted...
When asked but WHY it mattered neither could give me a good answer.


http://www.se-world.info/wcf/images/smilies/smilie_wall.gif


Are we being honest here? I believe the difference is that we all know the pistol brace was designed to be a shoulder stock, everyone that buys one is buying it to use it as a shoulder stock. And the atf knows this. But they didn't have a chance to rule on it since it was hidden in a dumb Velcro wrap armband that maybe some injured people would find effective.

Now the whole NFA thing is dumb anyways but that's a different story.

[voodoo_man]

Lol liberals

[Former11B]

Are we being honest here? I believe the difference is that we all know the pistol brace was designed to be a shoulder stock, everyone that buys one is buying it to use it as a shoulder stock. And the atf knows this. But they didn't have a chance to rule on it since it was hidden in a dumb Velcro wrap armband that maybe some injured people would find effective.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/DownSouthTAS/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps9df7e264.jpg

[Pyzik]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/DownSouthTAS/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps9df7e264.jpg
+1

[n4p226r]

Haha. I knew I was going to get crap for that. And since I am new here let me clarify. I am not trying to say your wrong with your description of what constitutes a redesign. Using a pistol brace as a shoulder stock doesn't redesign anything.

[CK 187]

BUT even if this was enforceable, anyone willing to be the test case? [BD]

Nope

http://i.imgur.com/SOPg1fa.jpg

[WHSmithIV]

Are we being honest here? I believe the difference is that we all know the pistol brace was designed to be a shoulder stock, everyone that buys one is buying it to use it as a shoulder stock. And the atf knows this. But they didn't have a chance to rule on it since it was hidden in a dumb Velcro wrap armband that maybe some injured people would find effective.

Now the whole NFA thing is dumb anyways but that's a different story.

What the sh!thead has done who currently runs the ATF is to try to MAKE a law. Only Congress can make a law. ATF is trying to define that USING something other than how it was designed, without changing it at all is 'making' it into something else - i.e. by their own letter, 're-designing' that product.

Well, the product has NOT been been redesigned in any way.Nothing has been modified or changed. It is no different than moving the buffer tube to one's shoulder, pad or no pad. That brace doesn't make a good stock, we all know that.

No AR pistol with a Sig brace on it can in any way be classified as a SBR. Legally, any ATF letter actually is not a law to begin with. It is their way of trying to MAKE a law outside of Congress, and only Congress has the authority to make laws, not the ATF (or the EPA, the FDA or any other agency of the government).

The bottom line is that the ATF has zero authority to make any laws. The Sig brace is what it is and is legal under both the NFA and GCA LAWS. (no point in debating the Constitutionality of those right now). So, it is a legal piece of equipment. I'm quite sure that Sig Sauer is already mounting a lawsuit against the ATF about this idotic bullshit.

The most ridiculous part of all this is that the brace isn't really much better as a stock than a buffer tube itself is. I have never even tried one, but from a physics perspective, I can see it.

Would anybody like to make a $5 bet that within 2 years ATF will reverse that newest letter?

P.S. just as a side note, the NFA items tax stamp can NOT be raised unless a bill gets originated in the House to change the cost of it. All tax bills must originate in the House as per the Constitution. I don't see that $200 changing anytime soon. Probably not even in my lifetime.

[Former11B]

^^Ill take your bet only because the ATF isn't known for rational decisions. This is the agency documented for setting up storefront stings, CREATING crime rather than doing anything about existing offenders, and prosecuting a mentally ill person in the process.

[SINNER]

Your statement holds no water. Anyone who HAS used the Sig brace knows it functions just fine as a stock but is almost impossible to shoot as "intended".

[n4p226r]

What the sh!thead has done who currently runs the ATF is to try to MAKE a law. Only Congress can make a law. ATF is trying to define that USING something other than how it was designed, without changing it at all is 'making' it into something else - i.e. by their own letter, 're-designing' that product.

Well, the product has NOT been been redesigned in any way.Nothing has been modified or changed. It is no different than moving the buffer tube to one's shoulder, pad or no pad. That brace doesn't make a good stock, we all know that.

No AR pistol with a Sig brace on it can in any way be classified as a SBR. Legally, any ATF letter actually is not a law to begin with. It is their way of trying to MAKE a law outside of Congress, and only Congress has the authority to make laws, not the ATF (or the EPA, the FDA or any other agency of the government).

The bottom line is that the ATF has zero authority to make any laws. The Sig brace is what it is and is legal under both the NFA and GCA LAWS. (no point in debating the Constitutionality of those right now). So, it is a legal piece of equipment. I'm quite sure that Sig Sauer is already mounting a lawsuit against the ATF about this idotic bullshit.

The most ridiculous part of all this is that the brace isn't really much better as a stock than a buffer tube itself is. I have never even tried one, but from a physics perspective, I can see it.

Would anybody like to make a $5 bet that within 2 years ATF will reverse that newest letter?

P.S. just as a side note, the NFA items tax stamp can NOT be raised unless a bill gets originated in the House to change the cost of it. All tax bills must originate in the House as per the Constitution. I don't see that $200 changing anytime soon. Probably not even in my lifetime.


i agree with everything written here. and living in nj, i know how lawmakers screw you, and then those implementing the laws screw you more. my thoughts on this is that once it was legally defined as a pistol part, that should have been the end of it. but i was surprised to see it written as a pistol part originally. either way its all illegal where i live :(

[WHSmithIV]

I'm taking the bet Sinner if you want to wage the $5 - two years from now I'll collect from the losers. If I lose, I'll pay in cash.

Former11B is the first one who wants to make the bet. Do you also want to make a bet Sinner?

Former11B, your $5 bet is recorded. If I win, you send me 5 bucks, If I lose, I'll send you 5 bucks. 2 years from today is the bet that by then, this bullshit ruling will be thrown out.

[Former11B]

BUT even if this was enforceable, anyone willing to be the test case? [BD]

If I'm the one that gets caught up in their petty BS, sure.

If Miller, of US vs Miller (original short barreled shotgun case) had literally stuck to his guns, we probably wouldn't be talking about this. But even he was worried about imprisonment by a government much less intrusive than it is today. You'd have to really know what you're doing and have some seriously loyal connections to hide from the Fed your whole life.

It's interesting a US District court threw out the indictment on Miller (who was charged with transporting a short barreled shotgun in 1939, in violation of the 5 year prior NFA, which hardly anyone was familiar with) because it clearly violated the 2A on the basis of keeping and bearing arms. The Fed appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and won BECAUSE THE APPELLEES WERE ABSENT...scared by the power of the government, unable to financially keep up with the government who uses taxpayers' own money in order to violate their rights on the streets and in courts.

The whole case is here if anyone isn't familiar with it: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Puckett/MillerShotgun.pdf

[Former11B]

Your statement holds no water. Anyone who HAS used the Sig brace knows it functions just fine as a stock but is almost impossible to shoot as "intended".

Because you're not the one it was originally intended for. Take away your other physical means of supporting the AR pistol through means of a disability, and I bet you'd see differently. Problem is, it's really hard to make and sell a product FOR USE BY DISABLED PERSONS ONLY. Therefore anyone can buy it and use it as they see fit

[Gaspipeshooter]

Your statement holds no water. Anyone who HAS used the Sig brace knows it functions just fine as a stock but is almost impossible to shoot as "intended".

I'll second that...

[Gaspipeshooter]

Because you're not the one it was originally intended for. Take away your other physical means of supporting the AR pistol through means of a disability, and I bet you'd see differently. Problem is, it's really hard to make and sell a product FOR USE BY DISABLED PERSONS ONLY. Therefore anyone can buy it and use it as they see fit

I seconded Sinner's comment because I have used the Sig Brace as designed and intended. One-handed without a support of some kind under the front of the gun? Very difficult to shoot well. The weight of the gun cantilevered out in front of the grip is HEAVY.

[WHSmithIV]

I seconded Sinner's comment because I have used the Sig Brace as designed and intended. One-handed without a support of some kind under the front of the gun? Very difficult to shoot well. The weight of the gun cantilevered out in front of the grip is HEAVY.

What length barrel did it have and what extras on it? I think that with a 7.5" light barrel and minimal weight handguard, minimal weight sights it 'might' help, but I do have two useful arms. I'm trying to think of this tool as a potential one handed tool.

I'm only asking this out of curiosity because I can envision situations where such a brace could be useful with the right gun design. Partly it most certainly pertains to the strength of the arm used for shooting as well. Not all people have the same strength in their arms.

I am 100% in agreement with UWone's thoughts about the value of using a Sig brace as a stock. Might as well just stick the buffer tube to my shoulder as far as I'm concerned. I have long arms too.

Quite honestly, with anything over a minimal length 7.5" barrel with minimal weight forward of the shooting hand it certainly does make sense that it would be difficult to fire on target without a lot of strength in the firing hand and arm. The brace would help by helping using the arm for stabilization, but - as with anything, there is a cost tradeoff. With only one useful arm, how could any of us wrap that strap around our one useful arm?


There are a lot of variables Gaspipeshooter. I'ld really like to know what you were shooting when you tested it. It will help me understanding any potential usefulness of this myself.

[WHSmithIV]

I'm going to go a little bit off topic now.

Who builds a SBR with a tax stamp designing it to be shot with only one hand? Who of us build an AR pistol intending to shoot it with only one hand?

[Gaspipeshooter]

http://www.ohiowaterfowler.com/MISCPHOTOS/LILBLASTER.jpg

11.5" barrel, Adams Arms piston set up, Midwest Industries SS Series 2 piece free float handguard. The issue, at least for me, was holding the gun with my arm extended. Shoulder gets tired in a hurry. The leverage created by the weight cantilevered beyond the grip multiplies the weight. Think Archimedes and his lever...

[WHSmithIV]

http://www.ohiowaterfowler.com/MISCPHOTOS/LILBLASTER.jpg

11.5" barrel, Adams Arms piston set up, Midwest Industries SS Series 2 piece free float handguard. The issue, at least for me, was holding the gun with my arm extended. Shoulder gets tired in a hurry. The leverage created by the weight cantilevered beyond the grip multiplies the weight. Think Archimedes and his lever...

Exactly Gaspipeshooter, and that's what I was thinking. I'm not even sure that using only a 7.5" barrel would make it really viable if I only had one arm. How would I get that strap tight too?

[WHSmithIV]

If I only had one useful arm, i think I'd much rather trust to a double stack semi auto pistol.

[CK 187]

If I only had one useful arm, i think I'd much rather trust to a double stack semi auto pistol.

Considering reloads, I would agree. What a pain in the a** that would be with that thing strapped on your good arm [BD]

[Uffdaphil]

If I had one arm I'd want a high cap pistol for defense too. But I would still want the option of using the brace for fun at the range. So what if I need some help strapping on or loading?

The guy who paid the big price can decide what works for him. A crappy idea for me might be delightful for him.


I am optimistic about the latest ruling being overturned eventually because I can't see the use=design logic convincing a judge. Nor can I see the ATF banning the brace altogether. The bureaucrats know how televised congressional hearings with testimony by a bunch of amputee heroes would affect their job security. And the publicity would make the department look mean-spirited to the public beyond gun owners.

[Former11B]

If I had one arm I'd want a high cap pistol for defense too. But I would still want the option of using the brace for fun at the range. So what if I need some help strapping on or loading?

The guy who paid the big price can decide what works for him. A crappy idea for me might be delightful for him.


Well said. What I was thinking but couldn't get it from brain to keyboard well enough.




Former11B is the first one who wants to make the bet.

Former11B, your $5 bet is recorded. If I win, you send me 5 bucks, If I lose, I'll send you 5 bucks. 2 years from today is the bet that by then, this bullshit ruling will be thrown out.

Sounds good, brother. I wasn't challenging your logic or position, for what it's worth, just the idea of the ATF doing "the right thing".

[WHSmithIV]

I know Former11B - I hope I win the bet - even if I do win it I don't want to actually collect it anyway. Sig announced today that they are examining the correct legal response. I suspect that they are going to court for disputing the ATF ruling. They have their lawyers looking into the best, correct filing to make to throw egg on the face of the ATF.

[UWone77]

Sig's Press Release:


NEWINGTON, N.H. (January 21, 2015)—SIG SAUER, Inc., has issued the following statement about the recent opinion by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in regard to the SB15 and SBX pistol stabilizing braces.



“As reaffirmed in an Open Letter by ATF’s Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division dated January 16, 2015, the Pistol Stabilizing Brace (SB15 and SBX) is legal to own, legal to purchase, and legal to install on a pistol. SIG SAUER® believes that the PSB improves the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped pistols, and offers the product both as an accessory and pre-installed on a number of pistols.

“The Open Letter goes further to rescind a previous private letter regarding the ‘intent’ of the user of the pistol stabilizing brace. In the letter of January 16, 2015, ATF opines that a person’s actual use of the product as a shoulder stock can change the legal classification of the product. However, the Open Letter explicitly states: “ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm.”

“We question ATF’s reversal in position that the classification of the brace may be altered by its use. We are reviewing the legal precedents and justification for this position, and will address our concerns with ATF in the near future.

“We will vigorously defend the classification of all of our products and our consumers’ right to use them in accordance with the law. If we find that the open letter opinion is outside the scope of the law, we will seek further review.”

[mustangfreek]

Ill admit i didnt read it, as im still not digging the brace and good chance i wont run one

...Anyways..what is the jist of this new news?

[CK 187]

Ill admit i didnt read it, as im still not digging the brace and good chance i wont run one

...Anyways..what is the jist of this new news?

Sig is going to fight the new reclassification

[Former11B]

Sig is going to fight the new reclassification

If their lawyers think they have a case, the very last sentence is the only one that matters

[toolboxluis00200]

not my best MEME but you get the idea
https://i.imgflip.com/gp3s9.jpg (https://imgflip.com/i/gp3s9)via Imgflip Meme Maker (https://imgflip.com/memegenerator)

never mind i got it to work now lol [:D]

[DutyUse]

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/22/a7a5a386cd6775a1cf8256c291e79456.jpg

So these are invalid now?

[toolboxluis00200]

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/22/a7a5a386cd6775a1cf8256c291e79456.jpg

So these are invalid now?

yep you go to jail you bad bad sig brace shoulder thing that go up

[DutyUse]

yep you go to jail you bad bad sig brace shoulder thing that go up

Okay, but only if I shoulder it. Are they still classified as pistols?

[toolboxluis00200]

Okay, but only if I shoulder it. Are they still classified as pistols?

as long as you DO NOT shoulder it you are ok

yes it is still a pistol


EDIT it is stupid how the ATF made up a law or re word it to screw gun owner

[CK 187]

The ATF, feverishly cranking out those letters and rulings of consistency

http://www.fuelyourwriting.com/files/mr-burns-monkeys-typewriters1-640x381-600x357.jpg

[toolboxluis00200]

The ATF, feverishly cranking out those letters and rulings of consistency

http://www.fuelyourwriting.com/files/mr-burns-monkeys-typewriters1-640x381-600x357.jpg

mad munky style

[Gaspipeshooter]

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/01/22/a7a5a386cd6775a1cf8256c291e79456.jpg

So these are invalid now?

I have that same letter folded up in the storage compartment of the grip on my pistol...

[DutyUse]

as long as you DO NOT shoulder it you are ok

yes it is still a pistol


EDIT it is stupid how the ATF made up a law or re word it to screw gun owner

Okay. So you can still transport it in a vehicle the same as your handgun if you had your CC license? Condition one, plain sight (backseat)? Sorry for the questions just want to be crystal clear in these murky waters as I have to be above reproach.

[Former11B]

yep you go to jail you bad bad sig brace shoulder thing that go up

You literally have zero proof that anyone will get in trouble for shouldering it. Please don't spread that nonsense. By doing so, you empower the ATF and these "opinions" that are trying to establish law where there is none

[alamo5000]

Okay. So you can still transport it in a vehicle the same as your handgun if you had your CC license? Condition one, plain sight (backseat)? Sorry for the questions just want to be crystal clear in these murky waters as I have to be above reproach.

You better not have anything in plain sight in Texas. This plain sight rule must be from some other state.

[Former11B]

Okay. So you can still transport it in a vehicle the same as your handgun if you had your CC license? Condition one, plain sight (backseat)? Sorry for the questions just want to be crystal clear in these murky waters as I have to be above reproach.

That's a state by state thing but yes, an AR pistol is still a pistol with a Sig brace. They are legal.

[DutyUse]

That's a state by state thing but yes, an AR pistol is still a pistol with a Sig brace. They are legal.

Thank you.

[Former11B]

You better not have anything in plain sight in Texas. This plain sight rule must be from some other state.

This is getting out of hand quickly.


CARRY PISTOLS AS LEGAL ACCORDING TO THE STATE YOU ARE CURRENTLY IN.


Jesus does it even need saying

[DutyUse]

Sorry I only know the laws for my own state and a few surrounding us. Please don't use Kentucky Laws unless you live here! Follow your own state laws to the letter, the ATF is no one you want on your back.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming....

[toolboxluis00200]

This is getting out of hand quickly.


CARRY PISTOLS AS LEGAL ACCORDING TO THE STATE YOU ARE CURRENTLY IN.


Jesus does it even need saying
i was going to say is better to research state by state gun laws to be on the safe side
you don't want to be stuck in a jail for a mistake :(

[GOST]

The better question is can I run a Velcro strap through the sling loop on a VLTOR IMOD and call it an arm brace?[BD]

[toolboxluis00200]

The better question is can I run a Velcro strap through the sling loop on a VLTOR IMOD and call it an arm brace?[BD]
good question

[WHSmithIV]

The plain site rule applies here in Idaho. Can be loaded also.

[FortTom]

Sorry I only know the laws for my own state and a few surrounding us. Please don't use Kentucky Laws unless you live here! Follow your own state laws to the letter, the ATF is no one you want on your back.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Being a fellow Kentuckian, I can vouch for this. Our state laws are fairly liberal as far as most states are concerned. But just as our state laws are liberal, the man will certainly jack you up if he catches you doing something stupid or illegal.

FT

[GOST]

Being a fellow Kentuckian, I can vouch for this. Our state laws are fairly liberal as far as most states are concerned. But just as our state laws are liberal, the man will certainly jack you up if he catches you doing something stupid or illegal.

FT

That's the truth. Here in TN a woman from Maryville, TN traveled to the 9/11 Memorial in NY. When she got there she asked if there was a place to check her handgun. But she should have known better, that was covered in her CCP class.

[DutyUse]

That's the truth. Here in TN a woman from Maryville, TN traveled to the 9/11 Memorial in NY. When she got there she asked if there was a place to check her handgun. But she should have known better, that was covered in her CCP class.

Sounds familiar. My mom still lives in Sandy Hook Connecticut...yes that one. Makes it hard to bring the family to visit.

[WHSmithIV]

Sounds familiar. My mom still lives in Sandy Hook Connecticut...yes that one. Makes it hard to bring the family to visit.

Better to have Mom come to visit you DutyUse

[DutyUse]

Haha she does, she's from Kentucky obviously. She just has been brainwashed by the liberal agenda up there so she brings her ideology aswell.