User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/21/2022 10:33:11 PM EDT
[#1]
Yeah...unless they decide they want to bust you anyway. I guess if it's clearly not 'shoulder-able'....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/21/2022 10:37:43 PM EDT
[#2]
Correct. No brace, you are GTG as a pistol as long as you don't have a VFG (unless over 26 inches).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2022 12:22:20 AM EDT
[#3]
Is this confirmed?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2022 12:46:27 AM EDT
[#4]
And you can get a SBA3 off in about 10 seconds. This really is not that big of deal.
Until some court kicks this thing out. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2022 12:06:34 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is this confirmed? The proposed reg's pertain to the use of a pistol brace as a shoulder stock. No brace, no worries. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2022 12:19:01 PM EDT
[#6]
As it currently reads, yes. After the final rule posts, who knows.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2022 12:24:47 PM EDT
[#7]
Honestly they shoot ok with just cheek weld. Just sucks you wont get the maximum potential out of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2022 12:54:07 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Honestly they shoot ok with just cheek weld. Just sucks you wont get the maximum potential out of it. If you adjust your 2-point sling so that you are pushing against the resistance of the sling with your grip hand and weld the tube to your cheek you can be quite consistent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2022 5:30:32 PM EDT
[#9]
I don't think it really matters. The ATF seems to be just making up random stuff as they go along. It might be ok today and "illegal" next month.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2022 5:48:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it really matters. The ATF seems to be just making up random stuff as they go along. It might be ok today and "illegal" next month. This. Remember bump stocks and the Atkinson 10-22 stocks? Legal today, machine guns tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2022 5:55:03 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it really matters. The ATF seems to be just making up random stuff as they go along. It might be ok today and "illegal" next month. That right there is indeed the problem. BUT, I think the more they make up (overreach), the less likely someone ends up in jail. It becomes more about fear, and strangulation of the market, then actually trying to prosecute a case in court. No one is going to jail over bumpstocks....and the Army already said a bumpstock isn't a machine gun in the one case they had. Braces are far more common. I'm not sure if the AFT really wants to go to court with people waving around letters that say their Shockwave/Tailhook Mod 2/are ATF approved braces.....or even worse, take someone to court that has a brace which passes their new point system, but is somehow no longer a brace because of the wrong accessories, or because the AFT just felt like it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2022 9:35:56 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That right there is indeed the problem. BUT, I think the more they make up (overreach), the less likely someone ends up in jail. It becomes more about fear, and strangulation of the market, then actually trying to prosecute a case in court. No one is going to jail over bumpstocks....and the Army already said a bumpstock isn't a machine gun in the one case they had. Braces are far more common. I'm not sure if the AFT really wants to go to court with people waving around letters that say their Shockwave/Tailhook Mod 2/are ATF approved braces.....or even worse, take someone to court that has a brace which passes their new point system, but is somehow no longer a brace because of the wrong accessories, or because the AFT just felt like it. I think the point is to dare people to take them to court over it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/23/2022 11:24:30 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And you can get a SBA3 off in about 10 seconds. This really is not that big of deal. Until some court kicks this thing out. Pssh, you can remove a devoid plug and SBA3 in under 10 seconds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 5:35:38 AM EDT
[#14]
The Army?
"No one is going to jail over bumpstocks....and the Army already said a bumpstock isn't a machine gun in the one case they had. Braces are far more common." |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 7:48:11 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Army? "No one is going to jail over bumpstocks....and the Army already said a bumpstock isn't a machine gun in the one case they had. Braces are far more common." Sorry, it was a Marine/JAG.  https://www.ammoland.com/2021/09/us-military-courts-rules-bump-stocks-are-not-machine-guns/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 8:05:28 AM EDT
[#16]
So why can you just get a longer buffer tube and use it to rest against your shoulder ? Thats my plan if all this goes into affect . The atf so dang stupid and they hardly make any sense at all .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 11:13:58 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So why can you just get a longer buffer tube and use it to rest against your shoulder ? Thats my plan if all this goes into affect . The atf so dang stupid and they hardly make any sense at all . I built this before all the AFT crap started and think it is precisely what you refer to. The round buffer tube is 9" long which gets my 10.5" barreled upper to over 26" OAL. I do the push/pull method, adjusting the sling so when I push against it with my grip hand the LOP is where I want it and cheek welded against the foam sleeve. At this point the rear of the tube is about an inch in front of my shoulder and if I feel the need I can just pull it back for that forth point of contact. Work just fine and FAFT 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 11:17:04 AM EDT
[#18]
Ain't nobody got time fo that
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 12:07:32 PM EDT
[#19]
suggestion of what I use
for nose to charging handle facing target... KAK 81/2" buffer tube... reinforced shoulder... you need to modify the end plate by removing the alignment lug ... I use a rubber end cap, but not essential... for incremental length of pull the end cap can hold a spacer... not unacceptable discomfort https://www.kakindustry.com/ar-15-parts/lower-parts/sig-sb15-pistol-buffer-tube for slightly longer length of pull, a standard rifle length buffer tube and mill the end nut off of it... optional rubber end cap |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 12:51:32 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ain't nobody got time fo that Fo what? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 1:23:36 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So why can you just get a longer buffer tube and use it to rest against your shoulder ? Thats my plan if all this goes into affect . The atf so dang stupid and they hardly make any sense at all . I'll just put a stock on it. Fuck em at this point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2022 1:34:44 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll just put a stock on it. Fuck em at this point. Essentially where many will be at, I feel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/28/2022 7:39:13 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it really matters. The ATF seems to be just making up random stuff as they go along. It might be ok today and "illegal" next month. Sadly this |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2022 10:13:49 AM EDT
[#24]
I'm curious. What if you attach the brace to your shoulder? And just set the buffer tube into it.
Cut the brace down a little so the buffer slides in an inch or two. Get a vest or something with velcro and velcro on the brace. TYCOM |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2022 4:17:53 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm curious. What if you attach the brace to your shoulder? And just set the buffer tube into it. Cut the brace down a little so the buffer slides in an inch or two. Get a vest or something with velcro and velcro on the brace. TYCOM I like your thinking lol, Like a one of those Shooter’s or tactical vest that have the padded shoulder - and sew one of those U-shape door jamb catches on it or something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2022 9:58:59 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm curious. What if you attach the brace to your shoulder? And just set the buffer tube into it. Cut the brace down a little so the buffer slides in an inch or two. Get a vest or something with velcro and velcro on the brace. TYCOM 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2022 10:41:49 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm curious. What if you attach the brace to your shoulder? And just set the buffer tube into it. Cut the brace down a little so the buffer slides in an inch or two. Get a vest or something with velcro and velcro on the brace. TYCOM Hmmmm, maybe a surgical implant? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2022 6:32:13 AM EDT
[#28]
So far nothing in stone and no rule changes yet.
In case some silly rules ever are made, I designed a shooting vest with a padded shoulder block that accepts a receiver extension. I can adjust the thickness for distance to the trigger and it has a recessed pocket for the rear of the extension. It doesn't have to resemble anything like an arm brace. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2022 10:37:43 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So far nothing in stone and no rule changes yet. In case some silly rules ever are made, I designed a shooting vest with a padded shoulder block that accepts a receiver extension. I can adjust the thickness for distance to the trigger and it has a recessed pocket for the rear of the extension. It doesn't have to resemble anything like an arm brace. Have seen "pistols" with rifle RE's with a cane tip or chair leg tip on the end that would serve the same purpose without having to align anything on the body. I have a pistol I built a while back that has a 9" extended round buffer with a foam sleeve that I can weld my cheek to and shoot quite consistently and accurately, but I can also pull back to my shoulder for the 4th point of contact should I feel the need. No brace, no problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2022 5:40:45 PM EDT
[#30]
2 THUMBS WAAAYYY UP
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2022 5:41:36 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll just put a stock on it. Fuck em at this point. 2 THUMBS WAAAYYY UP!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2022 1:05:45 PM EDT
[#32]
Gentlemen, please keep the topic technical
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2022 1:15:21 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sorry, it was a Marine/JAG. https://www.ammoland.com/2021/09/us-military-courts-rules-bump-stocks-are-not-machine-guns/ Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The Army? "No one is going to jail over bumpstocks....and the Army already said a bumpstock isn't a machine gun in the one case they had. Braces are far more common." Sorry, it was a Marine/JAG. https://www.ammoland.com/2021/09/us-military-courts-rules-bump-stocks-are-not-machine-guns/ What choice did they have? I'm sure they didn't want their next batch of 'M4's' to be semi autos with braces attached. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2022 10:56:11 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Have seen "pistols" with rifle RE's with a cane tip or chair leg tip on the end that would serve the same purpose without having to align anything on the body. I have a pistol I built a while back that has a 9" extended round buffer with a foam sleeve that I can weld my cheek to and shoot quite consistently and accurately, but I can also pull back to my shoulder for the 4th point of contact should I feel the need. No brace, no problem. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So far nothing in stone and no rule changes yet. In case some silly rules ever are made, I designed a shooting vest with a padded shoulder block that accepts a receiver extension. I can adjust the thickness for distance to the trigger and it has a recessed pocket for the rear of the extension. It doesn't have to resemble anything like an arm brace. Have seen "pistols" with rifle RE's with a cane tip or chair leg tip on the end that would serve the same purpose without having to align anything on the body. I have a pistol I built a while back that has a 9" extended round buffer with a foam sleeve that I can weld my cheek to and shoot quite consistently and accurately, but I can also pull back to my shoulder for the 4th point of contact should I feel the need. No brace, no problem. Yeah, but my response was due to proposal to limit pistol receiver extensions to 6.5", measured from the rear of the receiver. If that happens, long extensions or things that lengthen them may be off the table. That's the issue up for proposal now, how different things that extend extensions to act as shoulding devices, whatever those may be called, arm braces or extensions. Anybody can make a flared or padded extension, but would it pass the test? The brace proposals, also include anything that makes the extension longer than usual, regardless if it is called a brace or not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2022 11:14:51 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, but my response was due to proposal to limit pistol receiver extensions to 6.5", measured from the rear of the receiver. If that happens, long extensions or things that lengthen them may be off the table. That's the issue up for proposal now, how different things that extend extensions to act as shoulding devices, whatever those may be called, arm braces or extensions. Anybody can make a flared or padded extension, but would it pass the test? The brace proposals, also include anything that makes the extension longer than usual, regardless if it is called a brace or not. Define "longer than usual." An A2 receiver extension is a thing. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2022 11:44:16 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Define "longer than usual." An A2 receiver extension is a thing. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Yeah, but my response was due to proposal to limit pistol receiver extensions to 6.5", measured from the rear of the receiver. If that happens, long extensions or things that lengthen them may be off the table. That's the issue up for proposal now, how different things that extend extensions to act as shoulding devices, whatever those may be called, arm braces or extensions. Anybody can make a flared or padded extension, but would it pass the test? The brace proposals, also include anything that makes the extension longer than usual, regardless if it is called a brace or not. Define "longer than usual." An A2 receiver extension is a thing. I was referring to the proposed 6.5" pistol receiver length limit or demerits, or however it may be implemented. That's the usual carbine / M4 extension length pass the receiver. The proposal states the length as 6.5" as measured from the rear of the receiver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2022 12:12:51 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, but my response was due to proposal to limit pistol receiver extensions to 6.5", measured from the rear of the receiver. If that happens, long extensions or things that lengthen them may be off the table. That's the issue up for proposal now, how different things that extend extensions to act as shoulding devices, whatever those may be called, arm braces or extensions. Anybody can make a flared or padded extension, but would it pass the test? The brace proposals, also include anything that makes the extension longer than usual, regardless if it is called a brace or not. I think this is still dependant upon the brace, or no brace. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2022 8:29:33 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think this is still dependant upon the brace, or no brace. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Yeah, but my response was due to proposal to limit pistol receiver extensions to 6.5", measured from the rear of the receiver. If that happens, long extensions or things that lengthen them may be off the table. That's the issue up for proposal now, how different things that extend extensions to act as shoulding devices, whatever those may be called, arm braces or extensions. Anybody can make a flared or padded extension, but would it pass the test? The brace proposals, also include anything that makes the extension longer than usual, regardless if it is called a brace or not. I think this is still dependant upon the brace, or no brace. Actually it comes down to anything that extends to the rear more than 6.5", regardless if it is called an arm brace, a shoulder stock or an extension. Pistol extensions, "longer than 6.5 inches." The whole brace issue is they extend from the rear of the receiver, as a shoulder stock does, or anything else that might be placed against the shoulder. A longer extension with or without a pad on it wouldn't be any different just because you don't call it a brace. The rearward length is the first thing that would determine suitability, not what you name it. If braces were limited to 13.5 inches from the trigger, would a 14" extension fly? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2022 8:34:33 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Actually it comes down to anything that extends to the rear more than 6.5", regardless if it is called an arm brace, a shoulder stock or an extension. Pistol extensions, "longer than 6.5 inches." The whole brace issue is they extend from the rear of the receiver, as a shoulder stock does, or anything else that might be placed against the shoulder. A longer extension with or without a pad on it wouldn't be any different just because you don't call it a brace. The rearward length is the first thing that would determine suitability, not what you name it. If braces were limited to 13.5 inches from the trigger, would a 14" extension fly? But the proposal has to do with pistol BRACES being used as a stock. No brace, no stock, no problem. I think you are reading too much into it, but time will tell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 8:20:45 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But the proposal has to do with pistol BRACES being used as a stock. No brace, no stock, no problem. I think you are reading too much into it, but time will tell. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Actually it comes down to anything that extends to the rear more than 6.5", regardless if it is called an arm brace, a shoulder stock or an extension. Pistol extensions, "longer than 6.5 inches." The whole brace issue is they extend from the rear of the receiver, as a shoulder stock does, or anything else that might be placed against the shoulder. A longer extension with or without a pad on it wouldn't be any different just because you don't call it a brace. The rearward length is the first thing that would determine suitability, not what you name it. If braces were limited to 13.5 inches from the trigger, would a 14" extension fly? But the proposal has to do with pistol BRACES being used as a stock. No brace, no stock, no problem. I think you are reading too much into it, but time will tell. Yes, but what would be the legal definition of an, "arm brace"? Its use as as a shoulder stock is determined by its length? It extends the receiver extension. It is about length, not construction. Define, "brace." The length restrictions are for handguns, including devices referred to as braces. If you think it might be restricted to just braces that are now currently available commercially, that would likely be wrong. Somebody makes a wooden extension, a plastic extension, a padded extension or an extension with a strap, it is about extending the rear of a handgun for better use as a shoulder stock. Just because you remove a current style brace, doesn't make an equally long receiver extension meet the proposed rules. If that was there was to it, somebody would just make receiver extensions as long and as wide as they like. With AR pistols, part of the proposals would be to limit receiver extension on AR pistols to 6.5 inches. If that only applied to mounting currently sold arm braces, there would be 12 inch braceless extensions flooding the market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 9:25:10 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, but what would be the legal definition of an, "arm brace"? Its use as as a shoulder stock is determined by its length? It extends the receiver extension. It is about length, not construction. Define, "brace." The length restrictions are for handguns, including devices referred to as braces. If you think it might be restricted to just braces that are now currently available commercially, that would likely be wrong. Somebody makes a wooden extension, a plastic extension, a padded extension or an extension with a strap, it is about extending the rear of a handgun for better use as a shoulder stock. Just because you remove a current style brace, doesn't make an equally long receiver extension meet the proposed rules. If that was there was to it, somebody would just make receiver extensions as long and as wide as they like. With AR pistols, part of the proposals would be to limit receiver extension on AR pistols to 6.5 inches. If that only applied to mounting currently sold arm braces, there would be 12 inch braceless extensions flooding the market. I am no lawyer nor AFT, but I read a "brace" as being an attachment to a buffer tube, not the tube itself. Could a cane tip on the end of a receiver extension be considered a "brace"? Perhaps, but I don't see the tube itself being considered a "brace" regardless of length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 10:46:35 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am no lawyer nor AFT, but I read a "brace" as being an attachment to a buffer tube, not the tube itself. Could a cane tip on the end of a receiver extension be considered a "brace"? Perhaps, but I don't see the tube itself being considered a "brace" regardless of length. That is my take as well. AFT is somewhat boxing themselves in, (which is probably why they had the BS "we can declare anything an SBR" wording), but criteria for a brace is somewhat defined. No brace, no problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 11:06:06 AM EDT
[#43]
It's the same issue, an attachment long enough to aid firing from the shoulder, including whatever length of receiver extension is used.
A 12 inch extension is not going to circumvent that. It will still be seen as aiding shoulder firing. That's the whole reason for the inclusion of receiver extension length on pistols in the proposed rule changes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 1:09:37 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's the same issue, an attachment long enough to aid firing from the shoulder, including whatever length of receiver extension is used. A 12 inch extension is not going to circumvent that. It will still be seen as aiding shoulder firing. That's the whole reason for the inclusion of receiver extension length on pistols in the proposed rule changes. But you could do that today. Nothing is stopping you from running an extended buffer tube. Tennis ball or cane tip =/= brace Sounds like you are trying to design a homemade stock (used to aid shoulder firing) instead of a brace (used to aid firing with one hand). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2022 2:51:39 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's the same issue, an attachment long enough to aid firing from the shoulder, including whatever length of receiver extension is used. A 12 inch extension is not going to circumvent that. It will still be seen as aiding shoulder firing. That's the whole reason for the inclusion of receiver extension length on pistols in the proposed rule changes. An attachment to the receiver extension, not the receiver extension itself. Again, I think you are reading too much into it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:58:19 PM EDT
[#46]
The thing I find the most humorous is 'Length of pull', how does one determine the LOP of a pistol? Pad on index finger is 5.25" from thumb.
Also I am not so sure I would agree with the "No brace, no problem" as not being included on their worksheet, but that is just me and I am a computer nerd not a legal eagle of any sort. Steve |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 4:04:21 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The thing I find the most humorous is 'Length of pull', how does one determine the LOP of a pistol? Pad on index finger is 5.25" from thumb. Also I am not so sure I would agree with the "No brace, no problem" as not being included on their worksheet, but that is just me and I am a computer nerd not a legal eagle of any sort. Steve Their "worksheet" is to determine whether your "brace" is in fact a "stock" and your weapon an unregistered SBR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 10:43:33 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Their "worksheet" is to determine whether your "brace" is in fact a "stock" and your weapon an unregistered SBR. The worksheet is only part of the problem, and a distraction. It was never intended as a clear or useful tool to allow a passing score. Read the full proposed factoring criteria at the federal register. They specifically state that certain other accessories, such as hand stops and flip up sights (or even the absence of sights), will be used in conjunction with length of pull, weight, and the presence of a brace to determine that your pistol is an unregistered SBR. They also go on to state that even if your pistol falls below the 4 point maximum they reserve the supposed authority to still classify your pistol as an SBR at their own whim based on their determination of "intent". While we are trying to play three card monty with their worksheet, they are trying to push through other broad reaching rules that make it impossible for us to win a rigged game. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 11:01:46 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, but what would be the legal definition of an, "arm brace"? Its use as as a shoulder stock is determined by its length? It extends the receiver extension. It is about length, not construction. Define, "brace." The length restrictions are for handguns, including devices referred to as braces. If you think it might be restricted to just braces that are now currently available commercially, that would likely be wrong. Somebody makes a wooden extension, a plastic extension, a padded extension or an extension with a strap, it is about extending the rear of a handgun for better use as a shoulder stock. Just because you remove a current style brace, doesn't make an equally long receiver extension meet the proposed rules. If that was there was to it, somebody would just make receiver extensions as long and as wide as they like. With AR pistols, part of the proposals would be to limit receiver extension on AR pistols to 6.5 inches. If that only applied to mounting currently sold arm braces, there would be 12 inch braceless extensions flooding the market. OK - So Just Make the Receiver LONGER in the back. Then attach the "extension" of 6.5" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2022 9:21:05 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The worksheet is only part of the problem, and a distraction. It was never intended as a clear or useful tool to allow a passing score. Read the full proposed factoring criteria at the federal register. They specifically state that certain other accessories, such as hand stops and flip up sights (or even the absence of sights), will be used in conjunction with length of pull, weight, and the presence of a brace to determine that your pistol is an unregistered SBR. They also go on to state that even if your pistol falls below the 4 point maximum they reserve the supposed authority to still classify your pistol as an SBR at their own whim based on their determination of "intent". While we are trying to play three card monty with their worksheet, they are trying to push through other broad reaching rules that make it impossible for us to win a rigged game. Aware of all that, and it sucks, but keep in mind that none of that applies if there is no brace. The struggle is adding an "approved" brace, and having to jump through all of the BS hoops. |
|
|
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.
