ATF rules Q Honey Badger pistol an SBR

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    163   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    9,396
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    in there open letter where the atf clearly said you can sholder a brace...

    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 … 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.*
    Good point, but still, they don’t write laws. Their letters are not laws. They are nothing more than an opinionated interpretation of the law. Once people buy into their opinions they get trapped into believing there are laws that don’t exist

    Another way to look at this debacle is to realize that the ATF is simply reversing its opinion, yet again, on whether or not they think it’s ok to fire a pistol from the shoulder, which is utterly ridiculous. They know it’s ridiculous and it’s possible someone there was embarrassed by the first letter that decided firing a pistol from the shoulder miraculously turned it into a SBR (poof!) and now they’re trying again, hoping that nobody will bring attention to how ridiculous the notion is.
     
    Last edited:

    Bosco

    We are the hammer
    Rating - 100%
    56   0   0
    Sep 4, 2009
    2,246
    38
    Covington
    Here's the full letter https://www.sigsauer.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/atf-letter-march-21-2017.pdf

    This is the full paragraph where what you wrote comes from.

    kO3YhK4.png
     

    jdindadell

    Not Banned!!!
    Rating - 100%
    267   0   1
    Feb 14, 2010
    4,200
    63
    Slidell
    Knocking a nail in with a screwdriver does not make the screwdriver into a hammer.

    Being objective about laws, or the old crap "spirit of the law" and "skirting the law" is a just verbal BS that half wits like to spout out if the limelight is pointed in their direction.

    Laws have words, and words have meanings. So if a certain item is termed a "pistol brace" then it is just that. If I use it as a door stop it does not change what it is.

    The ATF with their "reconfigure" BS is just a joke. If I stand on a piece of wood it does not make it a step stool. If I cut up the piece of wood and make a stool out of it, well then I have "reconfigured" it, not really , I manufactured (made) the stool out of the piece of wood. The ATF wants to somehow slip their "reconfigure concept" somewhere in the middle of use and create. That word is incorrectly used by them, as re configuring an item would indicate that it had an ability or design to be used in multiple ways, and was intended to do these things by design.

    Back to the screwdriver, it can knock a nail in (not easily in most situations) but I have not "reconfigured" said screwdriver in any way when I knock a nail in with it. I did not change it in any way at all, yet using the atf's argument I have "made it into" a hammer (or hammer like object) via "re-configuring". You can see that this is total nonsense, noting was done to the item. We all need to focus on the term "re-configuring" and somehow, legal action needs to be in-acted to remove that word and its (incorrectly) implied meaning from use by the atf.

    Careful inspection of the written laws has found "likely undesirable deficiencies" in the writing of the laws. Not a surprise to us, as those people who seem the most interested in bulking up firearm laws (firearm control laws) seem to often be the least knowledgeable about the items they are trying to control (See Fienstein and her "barrel shrouds"). So items like arm braces, ar pistols, 12 gauge weapons, and binary triggers will come under scrutiny by the powers that be when they realize that their laws were a bit to vague or a bit too specific.

    I often wonder if the ATF actively pisses off gun owners in an attempt to just stay in the news? Are they desperately trying to remain relevant in this highly polarized political shamble we currently exist in?

    Not sure how they are going to deal with the fact that just about everyone who shoots a handgun in any sort of defensive or competition situation tends to use both hands. Handguns are specifically stated to be used one handed, its in their definition. Am I re-configuring my glock into a SBR when I put assume an isosceles two-handed grip???
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    163   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    9,396
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    @Jdindadell

    That’s exactly what I’m talking about and why I use the example of handicapped guys shooting a handgun with their feet. The ATF must think we are a nation of fools.

    How about these guys? Have they reconfigured their firearms into... footguns?

    90008d06b3aad8b117912e35ba9be1bd.jpg

    3b05127e70af3a505fb5698fe6fa66ed.jpg

    I think I may write to the ATF and see if I get a reply...on second thought, maybe not. I don’t wanna mess things up for the handicapped. Next thing you know the ATF will be trying to write a new law outlawing toenail clippers or something.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Last edited:

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    195,221
    Messages
    1,546,084
    Members
    29,168
    Latest member
    Lyle.lejeune2017
    Top Bottom