http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_118/664188_Sig_Brace_ILLEGAL_TO_SHOULDER_on_AR15___Official_letter___OP_Edited_to_include_full_letter.html

Idiots couldnt  figure shit out for themselvews with the wealth of information already put out by the ATF regarding this matter... had to be spoonfed the shit...I guess they finally got tired of it.

This new letter and the one written to Sgt. Bradley were written by the same guy.

Already 2 other threads on this subject.

Coming from an org that can back peddle to the cretaceous (or further) period, this was as predictable as a sunrise.

So if someone walked into a gun store and asked to see a SIG pistol with the brace and then shouldered it the way people do to see if a gun fits them (not even knowing the law or anything) that person just manufactured an unregistered class 3 weapon and if they hand it back to the gun shop owner he is then in possession of said weapon....

Anybody want to buy a brand new Daniel Defense MK18 10.5" upper? :/

Of course this shit happens right before I've even had a chance to use it.  No NFA guns in my state.

And even if I decided to cheek rest it with a sling...I gotta get rid of my AFG?

This times 1000 and a 1000 dupes of this thread.

Ur 10.5 is worthless, I will pay the freight for proper disposal.

:P

The Chicken Littles crying the sky is about to fall are a bit late to the game. Many posted in a lot of threads this was pushing the limits.

It's supposed to be a PISTOL. NOT your workaround to skirt the SBR stamp.

It goes to "DO YOU NEED A FLAT VERTICAL SURFACE ON THE END OF THE BUFFER TUBE?" Everybody thinks you do, but a lot of SBR applicants shoot it without one until the stamp comes in. Nobody posts before and after targets showing the huge increase in accuracy, and for all that, it's a 50 - 200 meter weapon anyway. Even at 4MOA that's an 8" group at 200m. As a PDW it's still as effective as any other pistol with much better ballistics.

So, for all who post the brace or stock improves your shooting by leaps and bounds, prove it. Does a $50 to $150 vertical flat surface make that much difference, and how? All it lets you do is elevate the sightline of the viewing aperture higher toward your eye. If you need to increase the height of the sightline - add another riser. We already have to deal with offset under 50m anyway.

Really nothing more than listening to crew chief's whine when Bill France changes the rules in NASCAR and outlaws something like the 426 Hemi. Get over it and move on.

You still have to race and what you use to cross the finish line as a survivor is what you need to concentrate on, and that is skill and experience. It's been said before, a novice with the latest greatest gun in no match for an experienced shooter with last generations hardware.

The AR pistol is a stockless firearm, albeit one the NFA never saw coming. So, enjoy it for what it already is, buffer tube and all.

Yea no kidding!

I'm seriously considering just building an SBR lower and be done with it.

Just submit the application for the SBR with a lower you already have and then send the complete lower (minus stock, buffer, and spring) to Ident and have them engrave it on the right-hand side above the trigger/hammer pins.  

I used stripped lowers for my first SBR's but the last 2 have been completed lowers as it is simpler.

I'm not surprised they backpedaled at all.  I have my doubts their design vs. usage classification would stand up to trial, but who can afford the fight?

I decided not to use the SIG brace for my two pistols, instead relying on cheek weld only without shouldering.  It works fine.

I suspect ATF was seeing the proliferation of pics and videos of people showing off how they shoulder their SIG brace plus the people putting them on longer REs to increase the LOP (really?) and just waited for an opinion request they could use to turn the ship around.  Yes, it's just an ATF opinion and it only applies to the person they were responding to, but it's a damn good indicator of how LE and DOJ will approach these in the future.

LOL. All the fucking wanna-be lawyers making dumb ass you tubes about it, telling everybody that you can shoulder it.

I have SBRd just about all of my pistols. Time to list the sig brace while it is still in demand. I only "need" it for a couple more weeks.

Interesting, now they tell how to shoot them as well. Don't see that holding up, next its illegal that we missed our target too?
 

Would it matter if the OAL of the pistol with a sig brace is over 26"?
Or is the length of the barrel the only important fact based on this new letter.
Who would enforce this out at the range etc?

Idiots just couldn't resist poking the bear.

I proved it to myself... it was alot easier to stay on target with follow-up shots with the Sig Brace than without it. it was easier to eastablish a repeatable sight picture with the Brace than without it. This was my experience.  It wasnt impossible to be accurate with just the KAC tube ( mine have KAC tubes) but it was more difficult and required a new set of muscle memory responses vs using the Sig brace...... like all improvements... like an RDS, Flashlights, muzzle devices.... they are incremental improvements not leaps and bounds,  you can do without but the incremental improvements add up.

not going to sell any of my sig braces...........im going to use it as it was designed...with one hand and no pics taken.

Not to change the subject too much, but the last paragraph is my favorite.  They have determined that an Angled Forward Grip is NOT a forward grip.  I guess they will go back and determine a rose is not a rose, by any other name or not!
(and the paragraph before that discusses a "should stock" - whatever that is. - Your Tax dollars at work...)

+1

No, they weren't. For a chronology:

Original SIG brace approval letter:
11/26/12 - John R. Spencer, Chief, Firearms Technology Branch

Sgt. Bradley Letter:
3/5/14 - Earl Griffith, Chief, Firearms Technology Branch

Black Aces Letter:
10/28/14 - Max M. Kingery, ACTING Chief, Firearms Technology Industry Services Branch

Current letter under discussion:
11/10/14 - Max M. Kingery, ACTING Chief, Firearms Technology Industry Services Branch

Shockwave Blade Letter:
12/15/14 - Michael R. Curtis, ACTING Chief, Firearms Technology Industry Services Branch

- OS

You are incorrect. Take another look at the sgt Bradley letter.  It was Max Kingery FOR Earl Griffith.  Same guy, contradictory opinions 8 months later.

 

Look at the signatures.  The same guy wrote both.

Hmmm, you are correct and I admit I never noticed that before. The signature does indeed show same as Max's on his other docs:



I stand corrected, and thanks.

Now however, does that mean Max actually wrote the letter or was simply signing it to send out in Earl's absence that day or something but Earl actually wrote it?

Note also that Max's Black Aces letter, without specifically saying it,  also de facto allows a buffer tube/brace to count into official overall length on a firearm other an a direct impingement AR also, a question long in debate, and about which other questions have been submitted without an official response.

And also also note that Max seems to no longer be "acting chief" of that division, unless there are more than one "acting chiefs".

Obviously there is going to have to be at the least an official RULING about these issues. And then depending on what it is, litigation also. This seems to be coming to a head in about the same way as the Thompson case culmination in 1992. Only question is whether someone needs to be actually charged first to get that part rolling.

- OS

I say send in both letters and ask them to explain the difference. And then ask them what happens if someone goes in to a store and shoulders a Sig right at the counter? Is the FFL holder now liable for creating an SBR right then and there?

This



 

I see this happen constantly at gun shows with brace-equipped AR pistols.

I prefer my thordsen stocks anyway.

Oops.  Duplicate

It's absurd that any government agency has the power to wipe out a companies or persons investment with the stroke of a pen and based completely on the individual politicians whim.   Not to mention completely doing a 180 on a barely months old decision

Next up. Using two hands with a pistol creates an AOW. Seeing as the terminology used for pistol says designed and intended to be fired with one hand. Using two hands ought to change the classification to an AOW using the logic applied in this latest letter.

http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/guides/gun-control-act-definition-pistol

I've read many posts and the letters and not sure if I even want to bother to finish the pistol now or not just from all the "controversy" over the brace and how the pistol is held.

Yeah, certain elements in ATF are giggling for sure.

- OS

Any guess how this would affect all those folks who purchased the "Mare's leg" replicas  ( lever action handgun in 357,44 &45) ?     What about those little bolt action 22 handguns ( Marlin made ??).

 This looks like a huge opportunity for a class action lawsuit.....mike

this friggin figures, my SB15 brace from PA arrived wednesday and my KAK tube shipped today. now what the hell to do ? may have to send them back

That's exactly the way I read it.

Its a sad fucking time... i just bought a SBX brace off EBAY for $111... was a good deal until this debacle. Fuck it..I'll still mount it and use it.

Brutus2 replied:

And I appreciate your experience.

There are two things I want to point out that I would like to hear back on, first, why was the KAK tube not holding a repeatable sight picture? I think I know but would rather not insert my own idea why. Second, the remark on a new set of muscle memory responses. Should we expect to be able to proficiently handle  a firearm that is new in configuration, or do we need to get used to it and learn it's specific idiosyncracies?

If you have been shooting revolvers or 1911's, do you switch and expect to be instantly good at it? How long does it take to gain the muscle memory? I can tell you the simple switch of carrying a linerlock knife from tip up to tip down isn't all that easy - if you get used to one by carrying it exclusively for years, and switch, you should not expect instant expertise.

Same with the pistol - we also hear from those who have been shooting it much more than just a quick swap around on a weekend outing and they aren't having major problems. It is wrong it to assess it quickly with only the perspective of shooting a stocked rifle. The first who adopted the M16 were likely trained on the M14 and most did not dismiss it out of hand. They used it and became good with it.

As for saying It wasn't impossible to be accurate I could say the same thing about scoring 160 the first time I shot .22 International. I had some nice bullseyes, but too few. After three years practice, tho, I added another 100 points and started placing.

I don't think it would take three years to accomplish scoring equally well as a stocked AR15. It IS an incremental improvement, but the reality is that we DO have other issues that impact the used of a firearm. It's not about competition, it's about HAVING IT AT ALL., when an SBR/rifle  may be  illegal. And that is still the case - the pistol doesn't need an ATF form to cross state lines, may be carried loaded up front with you when a rifle in that state is required to be unloaded and cased, and can be used in certain seasons hunting when the rifle, short or not, would be a ticket to jail.

The lost of the SIG Brace is no loss at all for those who weren't trying to circumvent the law.Note carefully, in all the back tracking, the ATF did not say shouldering a bare buffer tube made the gun an SBR. They aren't even hinting it could. For those who planned on that specific use, it still exists and there is no issue. I am still going ahead with my pistol build with no reservations whatsoever.

For those who were trying to get one over on the ATF, tho, you took a gamble and now you see why it is.

I read it as...the issue is with his lower marked as "other". Doesn't the ATF require stripped lowers to be sold as "parts". That is how my LGS sells them. My lowers have been sold as parts and there are multiple letters stating that SB15's are legal to use as the user wished, without changing the classification of the weapon. I'm going to continue to use my AR pistol as I intend. Now if people will just stop sending ridiculous letters to the ATF & leave it alone.

Sorry phone triple tap

Also, for all of those who say we are side stepping the rules, I shoot at a friend's farm in Illinois. No sbr's allowed. Would also need special approval to take the sbr out of my home state of Missouri.

So...

Has anyone thought how this "opinion" could affect ALL AR Pistols?!?  

I mean, if shouldering one equipped with the Sig Brace could suddenly cause it to be reclassified as an SBR, what about anything (and everything) else placed on the pistol buffer tube?!?!



Whiskey
Tango
Foxtrot

Over?!?!

Thordsen whats?!

Lol.

 

And this is the BS part of the new letter, the instant reclassification of a weapon based on how you shoot it.  Bogus.

If the same logic is used, you cannot use it the way many intend.