Sig brace from SB Tactical now allows for "situational" use from shoulder

[hardcase]

I noticed in my latest glossy of "American Rifleman" that SB Tactical received a new rulling from BATFE that situational or incidental (whatever that means) firing of their Sig brace from the shoulder with a short barrel is now legal.

This ruling only applies to their product.

[John A.]

I thought everyone had already read about this.

Here are a few of my thoughts.

The first being, ATF doesn't make laws.

Not being smart, but the ATF has been known to reverse their opinions and decisions often.

It would be impossible to only believe that this only pertains to a single company, but rather all such similar braces would have to apply the reg's equally.

[hardcase]

I thought everyone had already read about this.

Here are a few of my thoughts.

The first being, ATF doesn't make laws.

Not being smart, but the ATF has been known to reverse their opinions and decisions often.

It would be impossible to only believe that this only pertains to a single company, but rather all such similar braces would have to apply the reg's equally.

Not everyone. This is dated April 25 2017 (about 2 months old) and was a note in my July American Rifleman I just received.

SB Tactical_ATF Reversal of Open Letter Position
Saint Petersburg, Fla. (April, 25, 2017) – SB Tactical™, inventors and manufacturers of the Pistol Stabilizing Brace®, is excited to announce that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) has issued SB Tactical a reversal letter containing a sensible clarification of the Bureau’s position on the lawful use of SB Tactical braces.

I suppose I should have said the interpretation of a "lawful use".

As far as applicable use on other such similar braces, go for it if you feel froggy. I don't have one. All my SBRs are stamped.

[plant.one]

at this point, I feel they've ruined it with the flip flopping.

if there was some consistency in things I'd be more likely to be willing to believe this was a long term answer. but with all the back and forth shit - just ... ugh...

and since not everyone may have heard about it - if you're doing this at a public range, you're likely to have some dipweed get all excited over it, or some overzealous RSO, etc... which is unfortunate. even if you don't have to interact with authorities over the damn thing, its just now gotten to a point where its too much potential drama because of the inconsistency on the legal opinion, for me anyway.

[John A.]

The Akins accelerator is legal.

The akins accelerator is not legal.

The GSGSD is legal for import just the way it is.

The GSGSD is not legal to own because we have determined the fake silencer is a real silencer and must be surrendered. Regardless that it doesn't actually decrease the sound of a gunshot. Just because we say so.

"These airsoft guns that we confiscated from customs in Washington state destined for that toy shop looked too much like real machineguns."

--for those that don't know about that trainwreck: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/103283 ... DATE_.html

The broomhandle mauser is a pistol, but has a stock, and is not classified as an SBR.

A 9mm AR15 pistol with an attachable stock is a short barrel rifle.

And the list goes on and on.

Really, I'm not being critical of the ATF in all their decisions. There are some good people working there. I have no doubt of that. I have met a few of them personally and they were some of the most professional people you will ever meet.

But unfortunately, some of the ones that aren't really paint the whole agency in a bad light. Ruby Ridge, Waco, Fast and Furious didn't help public opinion either, but is probably a lot more involved than the thread was intending.

I think gov't agencies should enforce the law, rather than make their interpretations of what it means. If a law (any law) is too vague to come to an evident conclusion of what it means at face value when you read it, the law needs to be clarified by Congress. That's one big way where fed agencies are going wrong trying to "make rulings". But I actually think many lawmakers want their laws to be vague as to intentionally be able to be interpreted in multiple ways all depending on how they want to enforce them. And besides, I have long said when people ignorant of firearms make firearm laws, you will have ignorant firearm laws.

So, Plant.one, I do understand your hesitation. I'm right there with you.

[dellet]

at this point, I feel the end user ruined it with the endless attempts to circumvent the law and sending countless letters in an attempt have someone tell them it's ok to do that. .

if there was some consistency in things I'd be more likely to be willing to believe this was a long term answer. but with all the back and forth shit - just ... ugh...

and since not everyone may have heard about it - if you're doing this at a public range, you're likely to have some dipweed get all excited over it, or some overzealous RSO, etc... which is unfortunate. even if you don't have to interact with authorities over the damn thing, its just now gotten to a point where its too much potential drama because of the inconsistency on the legal opinion, for me anyway.

FIFY.

The problem is the end user. The original Sig brace was clearly designed to be used with one hand. 99.9% of those sold, were to people who saw a way to circumvent a tax stamp. As more people found a way to make a buck, more ways to stretch the original idea were developed.

People who buy braces with the intent to shoulder them, are no different than a whore with no pimp that calls themselves an "escort". Everyone knows what's going on, it's just not worth it to arrest and prosecute.

[plant.one]

I agree dellet. the general public at large is as much to blame as anyone. but there's enough blame to go around to all party's, including as you noted the retailers pushing the product, and the agency's that regulate them.

it doesn't help that the BATFE has been politicized in the past administration to help drive agenda's. the sig brace ruling change, the attempted AP ruling changes, 41P, etc etc etc... its a hot mess all around.

[dellet]

I agree dellet. the general public at large is as much to blame as anyone. but there's enough blame to go around to all party's, including as you noted the retailers pushing the product, and the agency's that regulate them.

it doesn't help that the BATFE has been politicized in the past administration to help drive agenda's. the sig brace ruling change, the attempted AP ruling changes, 41P, etc etc etc... its a hot mess all around.

Think of the fun it would be if all the "escorts" you tubed their "dates"

Think they write letters asking if they're ok to continue as they are?

In both example someone's getting screwed, but if I had to guess which industry will fail first............

[RAINS]

I would not place blame for brace-gate on normal consumers. Now if you put a brace on your gun then sent letters to the aft asking about shouldering it or you posted yourself shouldering it all over you tube. That's a different story. Stupid is as stupid dose.
The ATF is dammed if they do or don't. Just be careful out there folks. Remember this is the agency that once ruled that a shoe string was a machine gun. Penalties for federal firearms violations are often more severe than a manslaughter charge.
I'm not going to comment on how things should be. You'll just haft to wait for my book to come out! Kidding! Have a great Independence Day!



R

[GunFunZS]

I think people can do a very legitimate thing by intentionally blurring the lines of what is normal and legal, thereby making stupid determinations impossible to enforce with any appearance of fairness.

I would say with how many have been sold, BATFE could never get away with arresting people over the brace thing now.

That's a different story from harrassing a few hundred purchasers of Akins Accelerators.

If you compare public opinion and perception, or even gun culture perception of now vs 10 years ago for the following...

1) short barrel rifles / comparable pistols

2) concealed carry generally

3) suppressors

... All 3 are way more normal, and accepted to almost the same degree of firearms generally. Basically now most of the public that is at all Okay with the idea of individuals owning guns are also supportive or indifferent to those three. 10 years ago it was the other way round.

I think the pistol braces have ultimately done a lot of good for normalizing guns of different shapes. This absolutely affects what laws pass and don't pass and what will get you hassled at the range or in the woods.