Author Topic: ATF reclassifies SigBrace... you might want to read this if you have a Sig Brace  (Read 10834 times)

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8664
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Now we need some Powerful Magnets. one worn as a shoulder pad and the other, with the reverse pole, on the buffer tube.

They need to be designed so that a "pocket" is formed with the shoulder pad setup and the buffer tube is held there without drifting.

They need to be strong enough so that a firm, solid position is possible without the two magnets touching.

Likely to be pretty impractical but might be fun to see BATFE's response.   Probably outlawing protrusions over a certain length at the rear of the pistol. ...  Then you just make the shoulder pad with a long projection forward...and watch the fun again.
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8664
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Was thinking how illogical this is...

So if you put the pistol to your shoulder suing the brace as a shoulder stock, you need to get it approved as a SBR.   

But put a longer barrel on it so it is a regular rifle when held against your shoulder, it becomes illegal when you remove it from your shoulder?  or something? 

What it needs is a Selector Switch with the settings:   Pistol, SBR, Rifle
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

MikeBjerum

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10668
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 612
Profitability must by high with this thing. Going to court against a government agency isn't cheap. Then again neither is that brace. $130.00+ for a plastic molded product.

I'm sure this is about more than the brace.  That is what the case will focus on, but if an appointed agency with no accountability can get by with this there is no stopping them.  The Courts are the only peaceful way to stop tyranny in this case at this time.  We need Pres. GWB to come back and inform BATF they are off base like he did with OSHA over stopping the shipment of ammunition.
If I appear taller than other men it is because I am standing on the shoulders of others.

billt

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6727
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 424
The ATF reverses their position more than a soccer mom trying to squeeze a SUV into a parking space at Wal-Mart. This happened with the "Hellfire" trigger group, and a lot of other things. What happens is at first they don't see it as a problem, (translated...popular), so they allow it with, "A Letter Of Approval". Then as soon as it is they, "take a second look". This is more apt to happen with devices looking for a way around an existing ATF law already on the books. The Sig Brace looking and acting like a SBR stock, and the Hellfire making a gun full auto that isn't.

If they then ban whatever it is, it gets real expensive for the company to fight them. Remember, the ATF has the taxpayer paying their legal expenses. They will appeal and appeal until the Plaintiff runs out of money. Just like the cigarette manufacturers did in the 70's, when they were sued for causing cancer. I'm not trying to insinuate any of this is right. It's just the way it is with our current legal system.


tombogan03884

  • Guest
Thompson Center beat them twice, once on the 45/410 Contender barrel, and again on the Contender carbine.

Sponsor

  • Guest

billt

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6727
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 424
There really wasn't anything to "beat". If you're caught with a pistol barrel on a shoulder stock rifle receiver, you are in violation. What they, (the courts), ruled, is you can possess both, and it's perfectly legal. But if you assemble them to create a SBR, you are then in violation.

Sandra Day O'Conner, gave a good interpretation by claiming that most people who own a shotgun, also own a hacksaw. That in itself does not make them in possession of a sawed off shotgun.

Big Frank

  • NRA Benefactor Member
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8250
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 437
I heard that if you had a stock on a Contender pistol frame, even if it didn't have any barrel on it, you had to be in possession of a carbine barrel first. I'm not sure if that's right or not.
""It may be laid down as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every Citizen who enjoys the protection of a free Government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at a Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency." - George Washington. Letter to Alexander Hamilton, Friday, May 02, 1783

THE RIGHT TO BUY WEAPONS IS THE RIGHT TO BE FREE - A. E. van Vogt, The Weapon Shops of Isher

PegLeg45

  • Chuck Goins: NRA Life, SAF, Constitutionalist
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12751
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 432
Was thinking how illogical this is...

So if you put the pistol to your shoulder suing the brace as a shoulder stock, you need to get it approved as a SBR.   

But put a longer barrel on it so it is a regular rifle when held against your shoulder, it becomes illegal when you remove it from your shoulder?  or something? 

What it needs is a Selector Switch with the settings:   Pistol, SBR, Rifle


It all depends on how the serial numbered receiver is classified when the form 4473 is written up.

List it as a rifle, then barrel length must be 16" or longer or it is a SBR...and OAL length has to be minimum of 26" (I think).

List it as a pistol, then barrel length can be any length (again, I think) BUT it CAN NOT have a shoulder stock, or be shouldered.
Now, I was told at a gun shop once that a "pistol" with a barrel longer than 16" could have a shoulder stock (??).

Maybe someone can clarify.... I'm to lazy today to look it up on the ATF site.

I'll have to go to the NFA board and see if it is there.
"I expect perdition, I always have. I keep this building at my back, and several guns handy, in case perdition arrives in a form that's susceptible to bullets. I expect it will come in the disease form, though. I'm susceptible to diseases, and you can't shoot a damned disease." ~ Judge Roy Bean, Streets of Laredo

For the Patriots of this country, the Constitution is second only to the Bible for most. For those who love this country, but do not share my personal beliefs, it is their Bible. To them nothing comes before the Constitution of these United States of America. For this we are all labeled potential terrorists. ~ Dean Garrison

"When it comes to the enemy, just because they ain't pullin' a trigger, doesn't mean they ain't totin' ammo for those that are."~PegLeg

les snyder

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 997
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
the basic premise that I understood when I built my "pistol"

to be a SBR, it first has to be a rifle... therefore, a new from manufacturer lower receiver, marked on the ATF4473 as "other" and listed as receiver (not a rifle) can be made into a legal "pistol"

any receiver extension (buffer tube)(rifle or carbine or aftermarket pistol) could be used as long as a butt stock could not readily be attached

a rubber end cap could be added, and was not considered a stock

alfsauve

  • Semper Vigilantes
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6885
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 336
I believe how it was first manufactured is one of the keys.  If it was first a pistol, then you can convert it to a rifle and back no problem.    But if it was first manufactured as a rifle then you can't convert to a pistol, at least not without paperwork and approval.

AR lowers should be sold as "other" and you perform the final manufacturing step.  So, for all lowers I buy regardless of my final intent, I'm going to first put a pistol buffer tube and a short barrel upper on it.  Take pictures and document that I "manufactured" it as a pistol.    Then I'm free to do either a pistol or rifle config.      To avoid the SBR entanglement, I just have to make sure you never put a short barreled upper on a lower with a stock and that I have no easy way of adding a stock to my pistol buffer.   (No officer, that ergonomically shaped piece of 2x4 and 1-1/4" drill bit in my bug-out bag has absolutely nothing to do with my AR pistol.)

The problem B A T F & E has created is in defining what exactly is a "stock".
 
Will work for ammo
USAF MAC 437th MAW 1968-1972

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk