It is now illegal to shoulder a "stabilizing brace" while shooting a pistol AR or AK

[thefirearmguy]

Well, many gun owners along with others questioned the ATF and inquired the legality of shouldering a pistol with a stabilizing brace. Yesterday, 1/17/15, the ATF ruled that a stabilizing brace must be used for single handed shooting. The thousands of people who purchased these braces now have glorified paper weights. Here my take on the matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuJHeF7y9q4

[b4uqzme]

Yeah. I kinda figured that was coming.

[CJB]

Sorry, can someone verify the 'ruling'

[RRP]

For those who haven't followed this issue, the SB-15 Sig brace is not illegal to purchase or illegal to attach to an AR pistol. Nor is it illegal to fire a Sig brace-equipped AR pistol from the shoulder, if the gun is registered as an NFA firearm. That requires the filing of Form 1 and the payment of a $200 tax stamp, which is why most folks are up in arms over this (pardon the pun).

When Sig sought the ATF's approval on the SB-15, ATF responded that the attachment of the stabilizing brace does not change the classification of the gun if used as designed. In other words, merely attaching a Sig brace to an AR pistol, whose barrel is shorter than 16", does not automatically create a short-barreled rifle. In that original approval letter, ATF never said the U-shaped rubber forearm brace could be wrapped in velcro and used as a butt stock. But that is exactly how many people used the brace. The legality of using the brace as a stock was questioned repeatedly, and the ATF recently posted clarification, linked below. In this letter, the ATF states that using the brace as a stock to be fired from the shoulder, rather than as a stabilizing brace which attaches to a forearm, changes the intended design of the brace, and therefore requires registration as an NFA firearm.

Here's the most recent letter on the matter, directly from the horse's mouth; the ATF.
https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fi...ing_braces.pdf

If one uses the SB-15 as a brace attached to a forearm, the ATF has no objection. If one uses the stabilizing brace as a shoulder-fired stock, the ATF says that changes the designed intent of the stabilizing brace, crossing the line into the world of NFA firearms. Pay the tax stamp or risk being caught with an unregistered NFA item.

[pwilson]

how exactly would the ATF know if Joe Shmo happens to put the brace up to his shoulder while firing off a few rounds at the local range?

[RRP]

how exactly would the ATF know if Joe Shmo happens to put the brace up to his shoulder while firing off a few rounds at the local range?

Unless there was an ATF agent present, or it was caught on tape, they wouldn't know.

Which reminds me of a quote I read a long time ago: Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching.

[downtownv]

They never cease to amaze, do they?
Thanks for posting.

[pwilson]

Unless there was an ATF agent present, or it was caught on tape, they wouldn't know.

Which reminds me of a quote I read a long time ago: Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching.

kinda like how you dont run a red light in the middle of the night even though no one is there.. lol

[marcinstl]

the bad guys are chasing me across the backyard, I take cover behind the maple tree and use the tree to brace my arm/body against while I take some shots. what is the ATF's position on stationary(non-mobile) braces? what about a "lanyard" that can function like a "sling"? can we just go back to the old days when a "pistol" was shot with one hand and a rifle or shotgun was usually shot with 2 hands?
can we fire some lawyers and stop trying to write a law for every little thing?

[RRP]

~~~ can we just go back to the old days when a "pistol" was shot with one hand and a rifle or shotgun was usually shot with 2 hands?

That's sorta what the ATF is saying, isn't it? One handed is good-to-go. Shoot it with two hands, held against your shoulder, and they call it a rifle.

[CJB]

So, beyond comfort, wtf is the difference if you put the buffer tube right on your shoulder, as many, many have done?

Seems to me that this is either el-stupido (mas loco for those in Rio Linda), or its a first attempt at puttin' the kabosh on all AR-pistols

[yqtszhj]

how exactly would the ATF know if Joe Shmo happens to put the brace up to his shoulder while firing off a few rounds at the local range?

Joe Shmo post himself on youtube. I saw that very thing after i heard about the ruling and thought to myself "well that wasn't very smart of him."

[yqtszhj]

So, beyond comfort, wtf is the difference if you put the buffer tube right on your shoulder, as many, many have done?

Seems to me that this is either el-stupido (mas loco for those in Rio Linda), or its a first attempt at puttin' the kabosh on all AR-pistols

Exactly. I don't see the purpose in the SBR restrictions these days myself. When someone can carry a glock with a 30 round mag in their jacket why the big deal over SBR's?

[jeepster09]

The big deal on "short barell rifles" is PENETRATION. No pistol round has the same penetration as a rifle....ok ok some may argue the 5.7 has the penetration.

[marcinstl]

That's sorta what the ATF is saying, isn't it? One handed is good-to-go. Shoot it with two hands, held against your shoulder, and they call it a rifle.

yeah, it's a rifle and I don't care what the barrel length is. pistols is pistols, rifles is rifles, why all the rules and definitions?
https://www.magnumresearch.com/Firea...nch-Barrel.asp a revolver, chambered in a classic rifle caliber. put a scope and a stock on it for backyard squirrel hunting, spray it flat black, write "tactical" on the barrel-- it's a lot more dangerous now? ATF gonna raid you? how does that joke go-- Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms should be the name of a convenience store? how much would the taxpayers save if the ATF and DEA were shut down?