[jimcorbin]

Man there’s a lot of anti Second Amendment people on here. Either you’re 100% for the Second Amendment or you’re against it. You fight for it all or you lose it all.

 

[RyanBDawg]

I understand that you guys want to fight this, but it is a loosing battle. Let's face it, this was a bad idea that was taken too far. It was always going to happen.

The government arbitrarily labeling anything as "short barreled" was a bad idea that was taken too far. I don't even comprehend the reasoning behind it. It's just as difficult to "conceal" a rifle with a 10 inch barrel as one with a 16 inch barrel. Which is why virtually all crimes and murders committed with a gun are done with a handgun.

 

[AK_Stick]

I'm honestly more worried about my stamped SBRs. They are all getting pinned 14.7s and are coming off the books.

Lol.

If they’re maintaining the NFA registry with the intent of having a list, you think they’re going to forget about guns because you suddenly put on a barrel that’s over an arbitrary length limit?

 

[B C]

ScottMn At lease add a up to date link !

The ammoland info is using info from 2018 .
Lets see a november 2020 dated AFT info .

To date I can't find were the oringinal SB15 is illegal be it a SB tactical brand or sig sb15

That's the thing, these are documents from 2018 that were uncovered using the FOIA. No one would know about them unless that. No one from 2018 to now knew about the documents. So has anything really changed...yet?

 

[DoubleWide]

Man there’s a lot of anti Second Amendment people on here. Either you’re 100% for the Second Amendment or you’re against it. You fight for it all or you lose it all.

I consider myself a supporter of the second amendment. The fact you can buy this and you can buy that, but what's in between is regulated differently or possibly illegal is stupid. I don't however want my neighbor to have nuclear arms. In the future, I probably don't want them to have a future emp rifle that wipes out electronics in a 10 block direction. The problem is that I don't trust politicians to rewrite it either.

I can also think up random weapons and slightly different variations that could be in a different category that could be made in the next 230 years.

 

[Khufu]

Much like bump stocks, I think these 'workaround' products (like, as mentioned above, bump stocks, binary triggers and AR pistols) do essentially attempt to thwart the intent of a specific law. While I disagree (strongly) with those laws, it doesn't seem like the time to fight is when they ban pistol 'braces', but when they ban short barreled rifles.

All these loophole-exploiting products have, to me, a short life expectancy. Not how it should be, but controverting the will of the law with a gimmick isn't the ultimate solution.

Larry

There is no such thing a "loophole"

Get that out of your vocabulary. That is what anti-gun people want you to think.

When people say "loophole" they are really saying "people are following the law and are not following what I want the law to be but the law isnt written how I want it to be"

Note the ATF cannot change the law. Only the legislative branch (with executive branch approval or veto of executive) can change the law.

The executive branch / bureaucrats (i.e. ATF) can publish how they will enforce and interpret the law but they must still follow the law.

Here is the actual law on the books.

27 CFR § 478.11.
Pistol. A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).


So, you need to look at an AR15 pistol.

Does an AR pistol fit this definition?

"A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand"

The braces attach around the arm to make it easier to fire one handed.

That in fact makes them PISTOLS because the braces specifically are designed, made, and intended [to make it easier] to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand.

So, again there is no loop hole.

The law is written above. Where does pistol braces deviate from the law as written?

 

[Joshhtn]

Man there’s a lot of anti Second Amendment people on here. Either you’re 100% for the Second Amendment or you’re against it. You fight for it all or you lose it all.

This.

 

[Khufu]

Much like bump stocks, I think these 'workaround' products (like, as mentioned above, bump stocks, binary triggers and AR pistols) do essentially attempt to thwart the intent of a specific law. While I disagree (strongly) with those laws, it doesn't seem like the time to fight is when they ban pistol 'braces', but when they ban short barreled rifles.

All these loophole-exploiting products have, to me, a short life expectancy. Not how it should be, but controverting the will of the law with a gimmick isn't the ultimate solution.

Larry

You need to read what the ATF has written about what you call "workarounds" with respect to Binary Triggers. Here was the ATF official written statement on Binary Triggers when making bump stocks illegal.

I know people give Trump a bad image about allowing the ATF to ban bump stocks. But read the entire ruling and what they very clearly put in to make precedent that all the other is legal in an official rule making response (note I didnt saw law making, big difference). Before all that was available and then not publicly was letters of approvals to individual manufacturers.


Here is the ruling so you dont have to search.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-12-26/pdf/2018-27763.pdf



The Department disagrees that other
firearms or devices, such as rifles,
shotguns, and binary triggers, will be
reclassified as machineguns under this
rule. Although rifles and shotguns are
defined using the term ‘‘single pull of
the trigger,’’ 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(5), (7), the
statutory definition of ‘‘machinegun’’
also requires that the firearm ‘‘shoots
automatically more than one shot,
without manual reloading,’’ by a single
function of the trigger, 26 U.S.C.
5845(b). While semiautomatic firearms
may shoot one round when the trigger
is pulled, the shooter must release the
trigger before another round is fired.
Even if this release results in a second
shot being fired, it is as the result of a
separate function of the trigger. This is
also the reason that binary triggers
cannot be classified as ‘‘machineguns’’
under the rule—one function of the
trigger results in the firing of only one
round. By contrast, a bump-stock-type
device utilizes the recoil energy of the
firearm itself to create an automatic
firing sequence with a single pull of the
trigger. The Department notes that ATF
has already described a ‘‘single pull of
the trigger’’ as a ‘‘single function of the
trigger.’’ See ATF Ruling 2006–2.


Binary triggers are NOT A WORK AROUND.

The ATF has found them to comply with the laws as not being machine guns.

 

[Khufu]

I consider myself a supporter of the second amendment. The fact you can buy this and you can buy that, but what's in between is regulated differently or possibly illegal is stupid. I don't however want my neighbor to have nuclear arms. In the future, I probably don't want them to have a future emp rifle that wipes out electronics in a 10 block direction. The problem is that I don't trust politicians to rewrite it either.

I can also think up random weapons and slightly different variations that could be in a different category that could be made in the next 230 years.

Well the British didnt want those pesky anti-tax people to have cannons either. They were the WMDs of the day.

So what did the British do? They marched on Lexington and Concord to take gun powder and cannons.

Do you know the rest of the story?

 

[PatinAz]

Who will step up to sue for an ADA violation? NRA? ACLU?

 

[Khufu]

Lol.

If they’re maintaining the NFA registry with the intent of having a list, you think they’re going to forget about guns because you suddenly put on a barrel that’s over an arbitrary length limit?

If you have ever bought anythig with a credit card to a gun store, online gun parts retailer, bought gun accessories through amazon, etc, the government can easily track it.

Where I live 2/3 to 3/4 of houses are estimated to have guns. I would say about right.

So, how could the government find guns? Assume that each house has 66% to 75% shot of having guns. Look to the house to the right, look to the house to left. At least two, if not all three (including your house) has a one or more guns. Not hard to figure who has them. Everyone.

 

[PEC-Memphis]

ATF says 23 "braces" are now stocks. They're now SBR's.

According to the documents that I read, that is not what they “said”.

STB didn’t submit approval for 23 models, so .... (1) they may or may not be stocks, (2) didn’t charge their determination* (much less law), (3) STB mislead buyers about these models being approved.

*not that the ATF has reservations about reversing prior rulings.

 

[PEC-Memphis]

I'm honestly more worried about my stamped SBRs. They are all getting pinned 14.7s and are coming off the books.

I don’t think they will be coming “off the books”. Just will not be considered an SBR.

 

[PennsWoods]

Man there’s a lot of anti Second Amendment people on here. Either you’re 100% for the Second Amendment or you’re against it. You fight for it all or you lose it all.

I'll play devils advocate here - if this is the premise then we should've never even needed these ridiculous "braces." They are in and of themselves a compromise to appease the laws against your second amendment right to put a stock on a 10 inch barrel AR15 or 14 inch barrel shotgun. Why not carry the fight further and make the stand at NFA as a whole?

I'd much rather see short barrel rifles and short barrel shotguns legalized than see a "stabilizing brace" or arm brace deemed legal.

The "we won't comply" crowd should've saved themselves the trouble and just bought a $40 stock instead of a $120 "brace."

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

This is not about ALL braces, it's about 23 braces that SB Tactical produced but never submitted for approval.

Sensational headline is sensational.

 

[syntaxerrorsix]

Oh my that was painful to try to watch. Just put a link to actual ATF legit document.

i am 100% 2a. If this is true and you did not see something coming? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck it must be a duck. Do you want to leave it up to some bureaucratic jack leg to tell the difference between theses devices.

braces, bump stocks, binary triggers and such is just flirting with disaster. Save your capital energy and fight for when they come to take your Glock 17 or M4 AR.

An M4 AR is an AR pistol unless you buy a stamp.

 

[Khufu]

This is not about ALL braces, it's about 23 braces that SB Tactical produced but never submitted for approval.

Sensational headline is sensational.

On the flip side, not submitting them for "approval" also doesnt make them illegal.

It just means they may or may not be "designed to be fired by one hand" and the ATF has not made an opinion.

But there is also no real "approval". If there was actual "approval" the bump stock ban would not have been allowed.

There is only opinion letters that the ATF issues about if they believe something complies with the law at the time the write the letter and how they are currently interpreting the law.

 

[porschedog]

Read the other thread on this topic before going into full chicken little mode.

 

[George Kaplan]

I understand that you guys want to fight this, but it is a loosing battle. Let's face it, this was a bad idea that was taken too far. It was always going to happen.

What other "loosing battles" are there? How many other freedoms are "bad ideas taken too far" we should just let go?

 

[Khufu]

An M4 AR is an AR pistol unless you buy a stamp.

Careful with that advice.

Length of pull and design of brace (i.e. designed to be fired by one hand) play a big role in if you will be prosecuted. Also, pistol buffer tubes generally are different (no notches for stock.. round).