User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:29:58 PM EDT
[#1]
ATF is butt hurt because of sig's arm brace basically giving people unregistered SBR's. Not that they should be registered in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:30:03 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It would be cool to have perma attached baffles to get it down to sbr length, and with only one form 1 be able to install the sleeve on whatever gun you are currently shooting. But I think its a stretch to think the atf would have gone a long with this. As much as I want to blame the ATF, it would take legislation to fix this problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:30:52 PM EDT
[#3]
Good. I hope they win.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:30:55 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it is this, then Sig might have one hell of a battle. 
http://twobirdsflyingpub.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/adam-painchaud-sig-sauer-mpx.jpg http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/448x299xP1210439-900x601.jpg.pagespeed.ic.gaZ0fTHlXw.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. If it is this, then Sig might have one hell of a battle.
http://twobirdsflyingpub.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/adam-painchaud-sig-sauer-mpx.jpg http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/448x299xP1210439-900x601.jpg.pagespeed.ic.gaZ0fTHlXw.jpg Not so much after the last case, in which a judge told the ATF to go eat a turd sandwich with their goofy standard by which muzzle devices are classified. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:30:55 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. ATF has classified a shoelace as a machine gun.... I'm sure they'll get away with classifying this as a suppressor. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:31:07 PM EDT
[#6]
If by some miracle Sig wins this fight, I solemnly vow to purchase a MPX-C (evan at the ridiculous MSRP they anounced) and attach a Sig stabilizing brace to it. If I could put a Slide Fire on it, I'd do that too!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:31:29 PM EDT
[#7]
Didn't someone post in the Sig Arm Brace thread say the only reason the ATF approved it was because the .gov didn't want to go up against Sig?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:32:18 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If by some miracle Sig wins this fight, I solemnly vow to purchase a MPX-C (evan at the ridiculous MSRP they anounced) and attach a Sig stabilizing brace to it. If I could put a Slide Fire on it, I'd do that too! SBR it and you can put whatever stock you want on it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:32:58 PM EDT
[#9]
The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:33:06 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You don't think every person in the gun industry has those days several times a year? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What happened at Sig? It's as if one day they had a meeting and said, "You know what? Fuck the ATF." You don't think every person in the gun industry has those days several times a year? Maybe, but I don't see any of them suing the BATFE. I guess I'm going to have to go and buy a Sig now. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:33:31 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SBR it and you can put whatever stock you want on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If by some miracle Sig wins this fight, I solemnly vow to purchase a MPX-C (evan at the ridiculous MSRP they anounced) and attach a Sig stabilizing brace to it. If I could put a Slide Fire on it, I'd do that too! SBR it and you can put whatever stock you want on it. What's the fun in that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:33:45 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dangerous strategy. That said, "Go get 'em, Sig!"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:33:47 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well all you have to do with a threaded barrel is screw on a suppressor. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. Yeah I was thinking the same.. This? http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/sig-mdx-1.jpg yep the baffles are already in place just have to form 1 it and buy the sleeve and boom silenced. Well all you have to do with a threaded barrel is screw on a suppressor. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Not to mention on any normal muzzle brake all you need to do to turn it into a silencer is weld a metal tube on the outside of it... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:34:21 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise. You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:34:22 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. It would be a form 4 because the tube is the "silencer". |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:34:43 PM EDT
[#16]
I know it's cool to make fun of Sig for their diamond plate guns and pimp-tastic finishes but I think, for a big established gun maker, they are pretty bad-ass for pushing boundaries the way they do. Ruger nor Remington nor Colt would ever put something like the Sig brace on the market. Or the MPX.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:34:47 PM EDT
[#17]
"economic injury” This is what's going to (capable of turning) turn over the 86 ban. I've made mention of it half a dozen times.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:34:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not so much after the last case, in which a judge told the ATF to go eat a turd sandwich with their goofy standard by which muzzle devices are classified. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. If it is this, then Sig might have one hell of a battle.
http://twobirdsflyingpub.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/adam-painchaud-sig-sauer-mpx.jpg http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/448x299xP1210439-900x601.jpg.pagespeed.ic.gaZ0fTHlXw.jpg Not so much after the last case, in which a judge told the ATF to go eat a turd sandwich with their goofy standard by which muzzle devices are classified. That was my first thought too. Anybody got a link to that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:35:17 PM EDT
[#19]
Wow, Sig is doing an excellent job of convincing me I need one of these. I almost don't care that it costs $2k at this point.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:35:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What happened at Sig? It's as if one day they had a meeting and said, "You know what? Fuck the ATF." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:35:40 PM EDT
[#21]
ATF Director B. Todd Jones is named as defendant in Sig's lawsuit and has 21 days, after being served, to respond to the civil action, dated April 7. Should we expect a "my bad" from the ATF or a "we're the government and we say so" response? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:36:02 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yep the baffles are already in place just have to form 1 it and buy the sleeve and boom silenced. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. Yeah I was thinking the same.. This? http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/sig-mdx-1.jpg yep the baffles are already in place just have to form 1 it and buy the sleeve and boom silenced. Or have the sleeve mounted in bungee cords at your range and you can shoot silenced using the "glory hole." 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:36:12 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise. You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? According to that one federal judge, that doesn't matter. Law says the device has to reduce the sound of the shot. Actually has to, and the ATF has to show it. The design, the intent, and the parts used don't count unless the sound level drops. That judge really shoved a boot up the ass of how ATF decides shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:36:25 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SBR it and you can put whatever stock you want on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If by some miracle Sig wins this fight, I solemnly vow to purchase a MPX-C (evan at the ridiculous MSRP they anounced) and attach a Sig stabilizing brace to it. If I could put a Slide Fire on it, I'd do that too! SBR it and you can put whatever stock you want on it. I though the muzzle brake length was on purpose to make the device non-sbr in the first place. It is a 6.5 inch barrel with a 9.5 inch muzzle brake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:36:36 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be a form 4 because the tube is the "silencer". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. It would be a form 4 because the tube is the "silencer". Are you certain? I would imagine that it COULD be either but if you bought the tube from SIG, it would be Form 4, but if you made it yourself it would be Form 1. After all, people DO make their own suppressors, but it's the baffle stack that is the "hard" part. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:36:43 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"economic injury” This is what's going to (capable of turning) turn over the 86 ban. I've made mention of it half a dozen times. How? I'm curious. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:37:22 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I though the muzzle brake length was on purpose to make the device non-sbr in the first place. It is a 6.5 inch barrel with a 9.5 inch muzzle brake. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If by some miracle Sig wins this fight, I solemnly vow to purchase a MPX-C (evan at the ridiculous MSRP they anounced) and attach a Sig stabilizing brace to it. If I could put a Slide Fire on it, I'd do that too! SBR it and you can put whatever stock you want on it. I though the muzzle brake length was on purpose to make the device non-sbr in the first place. It is a 6.5 inch barrel with a 9.5 inch muzzle brake. It is. It still gets a brace. Just 'cause.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:37:37 PM EDT
[#28]
I may have to find some cash to get a Sig pistol now...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:37:50 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise. You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? It's gonna blow his mind when he finds out water is wet and the sky is blue. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:38:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I had a suspicion something might be happening after this ruling for another muzzle device.
http://www.shootingwire.com/features/228649 OUCH!!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:39:32 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Should we expect a "my bad" from the ATF or a "we're the government and we say so" response? Quote HistoryQuoted:
ATF Director B. Todd Jones is named as defendant in Sig's lawsuit and has 21 days, after being served, to respond to the civil action, dated April 7. Should we expect a "my bad" from the ATF or a "we're the government and we say so" response? Option 3: a no knock raid on Sig HQ and some claims about providing guns to Mexican cartels?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:40:11 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No pics of the disputed device in OP or link. Fail. It's a supressor baffle stack, without the external casing, permanently attached to the barrel. If you put a metal sleeve on it, it IS a supressor, but until you do (presumably on a NFA Form 1 if you wanted to), it's clearly not a supressor. It will be interesting to see the rationale the ATF uses to justify the Sig barrel being called a silencer, when it is effectively no different than this being pinned on the barrel. 
Just longer and wider, at which point it arbitrarily turns into a baffle stack instead of a brake. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:40:14 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I had a suspicion something might be happening after this ruling for another muzzle device.
http://www.shootingwire.com/features/228649 Quote HistoryQuoted:
I had a suspicion something might be happening after this ruling for another muzzle device.
http://www.shootingwire.com/features/228649 From the link:
Judge Rules ATF "Jumped the Gun" Law Abiding Americans Rule ATF "Jumped the Shark A Long Time Ago And Should Be Dismantled" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:40:30 PM EDT
[#34]
So which Sig Pistol do I buy to support them?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:40:55 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to that one federal judge, that doesn't matter. Law says the device has to reduce the sound of the shot. Actually has to, and the ATF has to show it. The design, the intent, and the parts used don't count unless the sound level drops. That judge really shoved a boot up the ass of how ATF decides shit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise. You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? According to that one federal judge, that doesn't matter. Law says the device has to reduce the sound of the shot. Actually has to, and the ATF has to show it. The design, the intent, and the parts used don't count unless the sound level drops. That judge really shoved a boot up the ass of how ATF decides shit. I'm not sure what you are responding to.  My point is merely that OF COURSE it's not really going to be an effective muzzle brake, because it was designed to be a baffle stack, not a muzzle brake.
I agree completely that it's NOT a suppressor, and I think SIG are being hilariously clever by doing this. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:41:28 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good. Big company with deep pockets, so hopefully they can get it reversed and establish precedence. Something went off the rails in their corporate office. Between the flash hider that magically works as a can when sleeved and the "arm brace", they are picking some fights here and not by accident. Nice to see a big company like them intentionally thumb their noses at the feds like this. I wish them luck and will continue to buy their products. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:41:33 PM EDT
[#37]
I do not own any Sig products but now that will change.Because I am an American citizen I now "MUST BUY" a SIG MPZ"!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:41:44 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OUCH!!! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I had a suspicion something might be happening after this ruling for another muzzle device. http://www.shootingwire.com/features/228649 OUCH!!! The ruling went on to remind the ATF that having "a tail, grey skin and four legs" didn't make an animal an "elephant" or a child's bicycle a motorcycle because it had "three characteristics of motorcycles: two rubber tires, handlebars and a leather seat." He didn't stop there. He went on to point out that a Bud Light is not a Single-Malt Scotch because it is "frequently served in a glass container, contains alcohol and is served in a tavern" any more than a hockey puck is a "rubber bullet" because it has "rounded sides, is made of vulcanized rubber, and is capable of causing injury when launched at high speeds." "Learning that one object has three characteristics in common with some category," he wrote, "may not be very helpful in determining whether the object in question belongs in that category." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:42:16 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So which Sig Pistol do I buy to support them? Based on your location, P220. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:42:24 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Will Sig be the next Ares? No, SIG has significant money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:42:36 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So which Sig Pistol do I buy to support them? P220 or a P226. You should probably get both, just to be safe.
ETA: missed your location. P220 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:42:40 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Option 3: a no knock raid on Sig HQ and some claims about providing guns to Mexican cartels? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: ATF Director B. Todd Jones is named as defendant in Sig's lawsuit and has 21 days, after being served, to respond to the civil action, dated April 7. Should we expect a "my bad" from the ATF or a "we're the government and we say so" response? Option 3: a no knock raid on Sig HQ and some claims about providing guns to Mexican cartels? I'm already on the seized Ares list, I'll be on the Sig list for several Braces and pistols as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:43:57 PM EDT
[#43]
Yeah if anyone believes that thing on the end of the mpx is intended to be a muzzle brake then I have some real estate to sell you.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:43:59 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not sure what you are responding to. My point is merely that OF COURSE it's not really going to be an effective muzzle brake, because it was designed to be a baffle stack, not a muzzle brake.I agree completely that it's NOT a suppressor, and I think SIG are being hilariously clever by doing this. . Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise. You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? According to that one federal judge, that doesn't matter. Law says the device has to reduce the sound of the shot. Actually has to, and the ATF has to show it. The design, the intent, and the parts used don't count unless the sound level drops. That judge really shoved a boot up the ass of how ATF decides shit. I'm not sure what you are responding to. My point is merely that OF COURSE it's not really going to be an effective muzzle brake, because it was designed to be a baffle stack, not a muzzle brake.I agree completely that it's NOT a suppressor, and I think SIG are being hilariously clever by doing this. . Since ATF has ruled that (basically) suppressor parts are suppressors and machine gun parts are machine guns, the question will be whether or not those rulings are "arbitrary and capricious."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:44:14 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: no doubt Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I had a suspicion something might be happening after this ruling for another muzzle device. http://www.shootingwire.com/features/228649 OUCH!!! The ruling went on to remind the ATF that having "a tail, grey skin and four legs" didn't make an animal an "elephant" or a child's bicycle a motorcycle because it had "three characteristics of motorcycles: two rubber tires, handlebars and a leather seat." He didn't stop there. He went on to point out that a Bud Light is not a Single-Malt Scotch because it is "frequently served in a glass container, contains alcohol and is served in a tavern" any more than a hockey puck is a "rubber bullet" because it has "rounded sides, is made of vulcanized rubber, and is capable of causing injury when launched at high speeds." "Learning that one object has three characteristics in common with some category," he wrote, "may not be very helpful in determining whether the object in question belongs in that category." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:44:56 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dangerous strategy. That said, "Go get 'em, Sig!" ^This and more
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:45:37 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What does it say about our current state of affairs if I say I honestly consider this a possibility? I'm already on the seized Ares list, I'll be on the Sig list for several Braces and pistols as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ATF Director B. Todd Jones is named as defendant in Sig's lawsuit and has 21 days, after being served, to respond to the civil action, dated April 7. Should we expect a "my bad" from the ATF or a "we're the government and we say so" response? Option 3: a no knock raid on Sig HQ and some claims about providing guns to Mexican cartels? I'm already on the seized Ares list, I'll be on the Sig list for several Braces and pistols as well. SIG directors would be well served to put their dogs into hiding until further notice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:46:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Well, looks like I am going to be buying my 1st Sig shortly. I wonder what flavor it will be.....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:47:04 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's gonna blow his mind when he finds out water is wet and the sky is blue. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The muzzle brake is assbackwards if you want to prevent muzzle rise. You do understand that's NOT its purpose, right? It's gonna blow his mind when he finds out water is wet and the sky is blue. But that is what they were trying to market it as to skirt the law. If every retard can figure out it is not a muzzle brake, then why the fuck is sig arguing that it is one? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2014 4:47:18 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is a well-educated judge. If I ever get the chance I will buy him whatever beverage of his choice served in a glass at a tavern.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
