Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The New World
    Posts
    2,053

    Default Pistol Brace Drama

    According to a recent ammoland article https://www.ammoland.com/2020/11/atf...#axzz6ema2ljtI the ATF claims that only 2 SBA Braces are approved.

    Apparently someone was convicted for having a SBA3 on 14' shotgun too.

    What are the tribes thoughts on these developments concerning the use of Pistol Braces on your own weapons intended for stoping two legged threats?
    Paul

    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,730
    My initial thought is to wait and see what happens. This is still unfolding.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    920
    Regardless of what a bureaucrat decides, I've decided to keep mine. It's a burden I'm willing to shoulder.
    There comes a time in every manís life when he is called upon to do something very special for which he and he alone has the capabilities, has the skills, and has the necessary training. What a pity if the moment finds the man unprepared. óWinston Churchill

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    997
    In these days and times, I will own what I want...it's just that simple. If I want it and can get it...or make it...I will have it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    842
    Quote Originally Posted by Country Boy View Post
    Regardless of what a bureaucrat decides, I've decided to keep mine. It's a burden I'm willing to shoulder.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NWFL
    Posts
    16,170
    I and a lot of other people have been following this. The ATF has not to my knowledge sent a 'cease and desist order' to SB Tactical or any of the vendors that are either putting those products on guns or selling them to citizens.
    Will these rulings stand up to legal scrutiny and an honest court.
    Some of these ATF rulings seem not to stand up well in court. Gone are the old days when the ATF could charge someone and the courts would accept ATF's Judgement/ruling on the matter. There was the recent case of AR lower charges being withdrawn and more recently for a banned bumpstock
    First bump stock prosecution under Trump edict backfires in ...

    www.houstonchronicle.com õ news õ crime õ article



    Nov 17, 2020 ó A federal prosecutor withdrew the unique charge before the trial began for a Houston man accused of owning the device. However, the defense was prepared to call an ATF expert to testify that bump stocks, attachments that cause a rifle to fire more rapidly, do not render a semiautomatic gun a machine gun
    The Senate race runoff in Georgia could be key in what Biden et al. can do to us. It was supposed to be run in Dec and now it is set for early Jan 2021.

    I know many here say they will refuse to pay attention to such laws. We are all adults and most know the facts and as to where your line in the sand is only you can say.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    ME
    Posts
    71
    The one that everyone is making a big deal on (23 braces not having approval) is from middle of 2018. The SBA4 isnít on the list... as it came out in 2019 (after the letter). If SB didnít have approval, Iím going to say people would have heard about it before the other day.

    There was an interview on Military Arms Channel, with the president of SB Tactical. Itís an hour or so long. It really stemmed from the Honey Badger situation, but he went into the interaction between him and ATF since he started SB. That letter seems to fit into the description he stated, which the ATF originally saying if the technology doesnít change, they donít need to resubmit the brace. When he requested a standard to what keeps a brace a brace/makes it a stock... ATF started pushing back. He stated the time period where this started, which coincides exactly with that letter.

    For that 2018 letter, I donít view it as important... when you take it in context with everything else. If you just look at it alone, yes... it looks bad. Personally, I think it was released to attempt to divide people on braces... when bump stocks came on the chopping block, there was a natural divide that nobody had to create (I still think they are pointless, as Iím sure most do). Divide and conquer... which shows what it comes down to with the ATF; war.

    Now, the letter about the SBA3/Firearm... I really donít know much about the case. People really donít look at that one, even though it was dated a few weeks back (mid-September 2020). However, the ATF really padded it up with a lot of BS, instead of just stating what the firearm is (SBS or braced Firearm) and citing a law. There wasnít much of a reason for them to go into all that, with a technical letter.

    The BS stated that SB knows that ATF doesnít agree the SBA3 is a brace, and states it is a shouldering device. SB is flooding the market with SBA3s (no s***... supply/demand). That the SBA3 is clearly a shouldering device. And the weapon being examined is a SBS due to the SBA3. I view it as another method to split up the firearms community... because if the ATF is so sure the SBA3 is a shouldering device, and has allowed it to be sold since the beginning of 2018.... Iím going to say they are asleep at the wheel.

  8. #8
    The point they don't tell you about where they convicted someone on having a sba3 on a shotgun is the end user had actually modified it.. They used a mag and attached it in between the brace arms thus making it more of a stock but are they gonna say that outright? No definitely not cause divide and conquer and all that but something that I think is obvious but I'll state anyway is that ATF is acting as a rouge agency since Congress technically ordered them to stop making "determinations". Honestly I think they know they have no legal leg to stand on so they are just trying to employ scare tactics to try and get their way.. So in short I have no plans on changing anything in my lifestyle because a ROUGE agency thinks they are above the law and try to scare americans into doing their bidding..
    If I were SB I would sue the ATF for continued harassment, lost business and to bring up to the courts that the ATF is defying orders of congress. I honestly hope that SB has made a lot of profit off this but given how easily the U.S populace is manipulated via scare tactics probably not... I wonder how many deweys and bubbhas have buried or "lost" their property over this...

    Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,730
    Again, this is an ongoing process. There will be lawsuits. Until this gets resolved its pointless to get wrapped around the axle over it. You can say "I'm keeping mine" or you can say "uncle" or anything in between but it's irrelevant until there is a real, articulated and adjudicated "rule" to be broken.

    If you have a brace on a gun you carry you might have more reason to stop and think twice for now. Maybe it's just easy for me to not give a shit because I don't carry one day to day. If you think you might be the "test case" you have a more immediate cause than I do.

    Maybe I'll take a braced pistol to a public range and see if the RO gets his skivvies in a wad.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,259
    Yawwwwwwwn. Am I the only person not worried about this? I’ve just about stopped giving 2 fucks about what is legal today and outlawed tomorrow. Here I’ll make it easy, I am an outlaw!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •