SIG Talk banner

1 - 20 of 71 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,454 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

Most are likely aware of the ruling by BATFE regarding the Honeybadger being declarred an SBR because the stock can be stretched farther than other similar makes
But, the explanations seem vague and suggest others will not fit that so called measurement criteria

Imagine how that plays out in a Biden election win

I am going to make a prediction
Biden wins and no rifle caliber SB braced weapons will be considered a pistol and have to become and SBR and the required NFA BS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,454 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Note that BATFE has also declared we can no longer use and angle fore grip on these pistols.
I have one on a Scorpion and will remove it to be extra sure I am complying with the Borg, I mean the law
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
Need to get Barrett on the Court and have a few cases make it to the Court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
Once a brace gets longer than that 13" reach length its sort of hard to prove for most of use it still works when stretched out to 13" or longer as a brace any longer . My wifes is the original design from sig brace thats 7 years old & is just over 10" length of pull but she is only 5-2 . The biggest fix for use was a new grip angle change to a more vertical design grip to help with wrist angle . Some today are true vertical grips and a few are 14 and 15 degrees . We have the hogue 15* grips instead of the standard 25* . . Helps with your grip if using a on flush mount brace on a 7.25 pistol buffer tube Works well on a adjustable stock carbine too .

Guess I watch the news feeds for a while . I have a thordsen cheek rest on my 9mm pistol that works fine .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
It certainly doesn’t help when manufacturers show pics and videos of their pistol braces being shouldered. Hard to claim you didn’t design or intend use in that manner when your own promos show different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,990 Posts
They don’t make the law and they’re contradicting what they’ve already said, so who cares what they think? I think they’re first focusing on models that are specifically marketed like an spr, showing the brace being shouldered etc., not AR pistols you can build and aren’t marketed as a complete gun.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Pistol braces have always been on thin ice with the BATF, and now we have a company acting like they do not need to treat their product like it is intended to be a pistol, this kind of crap will hit the fan. I suspect/hope BATF is just using them to get every one else's attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: George16

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Need to get Barrett on the Court and have a few cases make it to the Court.
I am not so sure that will help. If the court will not overturn the NFA then BATF will still be in the legal position of deciding what is or is not covered by it. Barrett was a clerk to Scalia and is in his mold and he wrote in Heller that the 2nd has limitations. People claim this court will do big things for us but I do not see it. Most of the current sore points people complain about ( CA, MA, WA and others) regularly are covered by the 10th amendment not the 2nd and it would take a progressive court to wonder into the arena of redefining the 10th amendment. Something a conservative court would not be expected to ever do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
I always assumed this would happen, and is the reason that I went the SBR route. As much as I detested paying the government a $200 tax for each lower, and adding yet another set of prints and mugshot to the files they already have on me, I have three (3) SBR lowers. The process using a form 1 is relatively easy and fast (about a month) and at least for the time being it makes you legal. Because of my prior employment with Uncle Sam they already knew all about me anyway.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,536 Posts
From what I have understood, it was because the proprietary Honey Badger brace was submitted improperly for approval, and that for now the existing approved braces in wide use like the SBA3 and SBA4 are safe.

Does it open up the door for the aforementioned approved ones to pbe reconsidered and banned....who knows?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
The "Cease and Desist" letter was for a specific "arm rest" that BATFE said was a rifle stock, not an arm rest. It happens; a gun maker does something and the gun regulator says stop making that gun with that "stock". Nothing else to see here or to surmise by their ruling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
SB tactical does it right with videos showing the user with his arm in the brace and firing with one arm.

I'm sure they were laughing their ***** off filming this :)
 

·
Registered
Favorite: Sig-Sauer P220 .45 Made in West Germany
Joined
·
40 Posts
I anticipate that manufactures and individuals alike will continue to display photos and videos of “pistols” equipped with braces being utilized as shouldered weapons, thereby promoting their use as something they clearly were not intended for, and, as a result, they will someday be banned altogether. Remember how easy it was for the bumpstocks to be banned?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,524 Posts
Ok, so it looks like at least for now, all we know is that the ATF has applied this to offerings from Q specifically (the Sugar Weasel and Mini Fix), and it sounds like this ruling is at least in part due to how the ATF has determined that Q describes these products on their website, suggesting that they are designed to be fired from the shoulder, and thus are considered SBRs.

It will be interesting to see where this goes, and if/how it ends up getting extrapolated to all pistol braces, but that seems far from conclusive at this time. It also seems like the ATF is taking issue specifically with how Q is describing the use of these products, and thus may come down to how a company describes the usage of the products they sell with pistol braces, rather than the pistol brace itself.

Of course, this is super murky territory, and shouldn't be a much of a surprise. Those of us paying attention to the legal status and approved usage of pistol braces for some time have been wondering when this might happen.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,536 Posts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
I anticipate that manufactures and individuals alike will continue to display photos and videos of “pistols” equipped with braces being utilized as shouldered weapons, thereby promoting their use as something they clearly were not intended for, and, as a result, they will someday be banned altogether. Remember how easy it was for the bumpstocks to be banned?
I don't think there is much of correlation as bump stocks never should have legalized in the first place. Have absolutely no tactical or pragmatic value in anyway whatsoever besides indiscriminate spray and pray and mass descruction. That's not self-defense, that's psychopathic offense. I think it was legalized during Obama as a long term incentive to ban everything and was a setup for the situation like in Vegas. There is in no way in my mind that wasn't a black ops mission. No way he did that by himself and that fact that it has completely dropped off the media radar is no way in HE double toothpicks a coincidence. Arguing bump stocks are related to the second amendment is like the other side arguing full term abortion to be legal. Let's get real here, pull up our bigboy pants and face some pragmatic truths.

The pistol brace dynamic is highly tied to the CT Other categorization financed primarily gunners in CT to get around what they can for now. Though they are even more restrictive than what is being discussed here as only ten round mags, vertical pistol grip attached to the forearm and barrel length. Still better than nothing.

Several manufacturers are producing "Other" firearms, also called Connecticut LegalOthers, in various calibers. They have a shorter barrel than the banned semi-automatic assault rifles, and are designed so that they can't be — or shouldn't be — fired from the shoulder. They don't have a shoulder stock.

Specifically ambiguous, and in its own way a potential setup but nowhere near to the degree as the bump stocks. The irony of the legalizations of bump stocks and no other changes of federal legislation for firearms during Obama and all the restrictions we have since Trump is interesting to note. Whether we get a reprieve in November won't be predicated on which party holds the oval office but whether or not who holds the senate. The senates is the biggest electoral college we have that is effectuated related to legislation. Better be ecstatic the senate works the way it does as tens of millions in one state have the same influences congressionally as states with hundreds of thousands to a few million.
 
1 - 20 of 71 Posts
Top