ATF vs Q honey badger

[wilit]

In Arizona they aren't and state police won't enforce. Just spoke with them today. Same thing with Maine State Police. They don't give a **** about some opinion letter.

It's not considered law. It's an opinion. That's all.

The Noveske Ghettoblaster is next I bet.

NFA needs to go.

Not surprising state and local law enforcement aren't interested in enforcing Federal law. It's not Barney Fife you have to worry about breaking down your door. It's the guys from Ruby Ridge and Waco, Tx fame that will enforce it.

[sigstroker]

The issue isn't about their opinions, the issue is about them changing their minds -- they are actually not allowed to do that without providing a "reasoned explanation" (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/502/) as to why.

So yes, once they "gave birth" to pistol braces, they are legally obligated to live with pistol braces forever unless they can provide a reasoned explanation as to why they are changing their minds.

They can do whatever they want UNTIL we take them to court and win.

They gave no reasons why they changed the status of Q pistols. Nothing will stop them from doing the same to every braced pistol.

[sigstroker]

They are binding law. ATF arrests and prosecutes people based on their own opinions. Who needs a Congress or President when some temporary ACTING bureaucrat can just enact their own laws in 15 minutes?

[sigstroker]

Meh they didn't get their pistol brace approved. While they shouldn't have to this didn't seem like a big thing as most companies just get an opinion letter and call it a day.

Doubt it. SB Tactical pretty much pioneered the "get an opinion letter" thing from ATF. They wouldn't make a brace that couldn't pass muster. More likely is ATF is going after them first because Q is a small manufacturer and the owner base is small. They'll get to the rest of us soon enough.

[AregularGuy]

Did anyone read the article? This has nothing to do with the "pistol" but everything to do with the brace. Pistols were around for a long time without braces. ATF says:

"Based on the product description on your website, ATF believes these firearms are designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder "

[plumbum]

Doubt it. SB Tactical pretty much pioneered the "get an opinion letter" thing from ATF. They wouldn't make a brace that couldn't pass muster. More likely is ATF is going after them first because Q is a small manufacturer and the owner base is small. They'll get to the rest of us soon enough.

My feelings too - just using a small production, high visibility target to make people keep their heads down.

[L84CABO]

Video from "The Gun Collective" explaining things...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCpUdKf9TmY

[Bhobbs]

Q LLC Honey Badger

So, the ATF arbitrarily decides the Honey Badger is not a pistol but an SBR and sends a Cease and Desist letter to the manufacturer. How can the ATF just make things up as they go?

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-statement-atf-cease-desist-honey-badger-pistol

[AKSOG]

They are saying the trigger pull length is >13.5" with the proprietary SB tactical brace on the pistols named.

[speedrrracer]

http://calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1655263

[AKSOG]

The C&D applies to the specific Q pistols since the proprietary braces with the padding that sticks out the back on top causes a pull >13.5" according to the ATF. Q claims they are less in the drawing they have posted.

[tuna quesadilla]

Don't give up on your braces just yet. This is happening to Q specifically because they foolishly marketed this particular weapon as being able to fire from the shoulder. It looks like they've wiped it from their website, but someone posted a screenshot where Q had said something along the lines of "the brace is designed to be fired from the shoulder when needed". I'm trying to find that screenshot now. Whoever thought it would be a good idea to write that sentence about shouldering it needs a good smack on the head.

[Coolguy101]

33 posts on the other thread and I see one for sale with 3 newbies wanting it.

Nobody cares except for you. I didn't see or read the other thread, so this one gives me all the info I was interested in, which is why I clicked on the link to read it.

The dupe police needs to just go away. You are not providing a valuable public service.

[OCEquestrian]

I am surprised that anyone who bought one of these things is surprised ... you all KNOW its a SBR workaround...

[smle-man]

Braces are used as stocks. I have never seen a single person use the brace as intended. That's what opens it up for interpretation, particularly in gun-hating jurisdictions such as CA.

Not a good idea to have it installed, whether technically legal or not. Just too much risk even if you end up cleared in the court in the end...

I think they all will be ruled as SBRs eventually. I've shot some here in NC and that is essentially what they are.