Pistol Brace

Moderators: gds, bakerjw, renegade

User avatar
GunFunZS
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:14 pm

Re: Pistol Brace

Post by GunFunZS » Thu Mar 07, 2019 9:23 pm

Remember, the ONLY time a related issue came to court, BATFE got benchslapped.*, **

linky: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/ ... osecution/

The judge was very clear that BATFE was being dishonest by trying to mix and match standards. It set a precedent that was not good for the BATFE's ability to make up rules as they go,and be inconsistent.

Even worse for them, they risk the very real chance the defendant will reply with an ultra vires action, which they are rather vulnerable to. They have skated around the fact that they haven't been adhering either to their authorizing statute, nor to the general rules that govern all administrative agencies, including publishing their opinions, guidance, and rulings in a way that is searchable and can be used by others. To put it one way, the IRS is doing a better job of following the law. (Yes, all administrative agencies are acting outside the bounds of the federal constitution, but that's another discussion.)

There is a good reason why BATFE hasn't taken a lot of people to court. Even if they win the case, that locks them down to a particular set of reasoning. For them that's a loss. They are afraid to litigate because any outcome is a loss of power for them.


(IAAL)

* https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/benchslap
** https://abovethelaw.com/benchslaps/

BulletFlight for Android
mp15spt2
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 5:29 pm
Contact:

Re: Pistol Brace

Post by mp15spt2 » Thu Mar 07, 2019 10:37 pm

der Teufel wrote:I think the letter posted in the original message above is outdated.

Sig Sauer posted an update almost two years ago —
ATF Clarifies Ruling on Pistol Stabilizing Braces
Published Date: 04/25/2017
SIG SAUER, Inc. announced news of a welcomed clarification from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) on pistol stabilizing braces (PSB). The ATF’s refined position is that placing a PSB against the shoulder does not, in and of itself, necessarily alter the classification from pistol to short-barreled rifle (SBR).

In a letter dated March 21, 2017, ATF reexamines its earlier position, which stated that shouldering a PSB-equipped firearm could constitute the making of an unregistered short-barreled rifle under the National Firearms Act (NFA). ATF now states:

“With respect to stabilizing braces, ATF has concluded that attaching the brace to a handgun as a forearm brace does not ‘make’ a short-barreled firearm because … it is not intended to be and cannot comfortably be fired from the shoulder.” The letter continues: “Therefore, an NFA firearm has not necessarily been made when the device is not re-configured for use as a shoulder stock — even if the attached firearm happens to be fired from the shoulder.”

The following passage from the letter acknowledges the confusion surrounding the January 2015 “Open Letter on the Redesign of ‘Stabilizing Braces’”, and clarifies that ATF does not consider shouldering a PSB-equipped firearm, in and of itself, to render it an SBR.

“To the extent the January 2015 Open Letter implied or has been construed to hold that incidental, sporadic, or situational ‘use’ of an arm-brace (in its original approved configuration) equipped firearm from a firing position at or near the shoulder was sufficient to constitute a ‘redesign,’ such interpretations are incorrect and not consistent with ATF’s interpretation of the statute or the manner in which it has historically been enforced.”
Here's a link to the actual letter from ATF: https://www.sigsauer.com/wp-content/upl ... 1-2017.pdf

Thanks, i could not find anything other letters or your on their site.

When i purchased my SB, i was given a link ( find it later) to DL SB approved letter too, so i am thinking it may only apply to certain braces? But i don't know if the 2015 letter is their official ruling considering i can't locate any other,

https://www.sb-tactical.com/resource-ca ... tf-letter/

User avatar
dellet
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 5836
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: Pistol Brace

Post by dellet » Thu Mar 07, 2019 11:40 pm

John A. wrote:A shoulder fired weapon is a rifle.

Unless it's not.

The LP-08 Luger Artillery stock which attaches to a handgun is not a stock.

It has always been exempted.

Image

Why is it not a short barrel rifle? Damn if I know.

For no more reason than the atf said so I guess.

Just like the atf says a lot of things.

Any time that you have an unelected agency interpreting and enforcing laws and making their own rules and regulations, this kind of thing is going to happen.

They say the alphabet agencies don't make law, but just take 2 minutes to do some fast internet searches for instances where they make up regulations and therefore have the rule of law and the full weight of the government behind it.
That particular model is on the Curio and Relic list.

There are actually quite a few interesting items on the list that can be traded tax exempt. Most were made before the passage of the NFA, and are therefore exempt.

Exemption list
https://www.atf.gov/file/128116/download
300 Blackout, not just for sub-sonics.

ThreeHundredBlackout
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 310
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 3:52 pm

Re: Pistol Brace

Post by ThreeHundredBlackout » Fri Mar 08, 2019 2:02 am

dellet wrote:
John A. wrote:A shoulder fired weapon is a rifle.

Unless it's not.

The LP-08 Luger Artillery stock which attaches to a handgun is not a stock.

It has always been exempted.

Image

Why is it not a short barrel rifle? Damn if I know.

For no more reason than the atf said so I guess.

Just like the atf says a lot of things.

Any time that you have an unelected agency interpreting and enforcing laws and making their own rules and regulations, this kind of thing is going to happen.

They say the alphabet agencies don't make law, but just take 2 minutes to do some fast internet searches for instances where they make up regulations and therefore have the rule of law and the full weight of the government behind it.
That particular model is on the Curio and Relic list.

There are actually quite a few interesting items on the list that can be traded tax exempt. Most were made before the passage of the NFA, and are therefore exempt.

Exemption list
https://www.atf.gov/file/128116/download

I took a scroll through and saw that reminton prototype bolt action with 4" barrel..........sounds interresting !

Thanks for the link Dellet.
Only Jesus Christ Saves ! ! !

User avatar
John A.
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 4:55 pm

Re: Pistol Brace

Post by John A. » Fri Mar 08, 2019 10:37 am

dellet wrote:
There are actually quite a few interesting items on the list that can be traded tax exempt. Most were made before the passage of the NFA, and are therefore exempt.

Exemption list
https://www.atf.gov/file/128116/download
My wifes late stepdad had a 12" barrel shotgun that wasn't on the exempt list, despite only being made from 1903-1909 when the company went bust. It was a coach gun.

By all intents and purposes, just the fact that it had existed for 20 years prior to the passage of NFA, it should have been exempted.

But it was not on the list.
When those totally ignorant of firearms make laws, you end up with totally ignorant firearm laws.

blaster
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:18 am
Location: Fla. Keys

Re: Pistol Brace

Post by blaster » Fri Mar 08, 2019 5:20 pm

they should just take SBRs,SBSs and suppressors out of the NFA. none of them are a "threat to society" and are easily by passed by legal loop holes. for that matter, full auto should be de-regulated too! hell, the whole NFA needs to go. dream on.
peace through superior firepower

Post Reply