ATF vs Q honey badger

[IVC]

That's the idea - it's civil disobedience against outdated SBR/SBS laws, similar to how we had SSE and still use SAE to bypass handgun roster.

That's also why ATF is revisiting the issue. Someone there wants to assert their authority and prevent the public from seeing that there is really nothing special about the OAL and barrel length, that there is very little difference between AR rifles and pistols, etc.

[k1dude]

Why would a normal person use a brace if it can’t be shouldered?

Because it looks right.

Before the law changed, I had a couple AR pistols. Never once did I ever shoulder the brace. I stayed within the letter of the law. Just having the cheek weld was enough of a benefit. But after awhile, I added braces to my tubes simply because the naked tube was butt ugly. I did it purely for aesthetic reasons. Most people I know did the same.

And I'll guarantee there's been no measurable increase in violence or death as a result of these braces or SBR's. So the ATF has absolutely NO rational reason to go after the HB, SBR's, or braces. It's purely leftist anti-gun ideology.

[M1NM]

That may be the official (or revised) history, but the word was the govt was afraid of black people rising up with machine guns. Yes, my dad was around in 1934.

Depended on what area of the country you were in. South = blacks East & Midwest = Mafia DC = Veterans which is still one of their fears today when you hear DiFi and Nancy talking about unstable veterans with PTSD rising up against .gov.

[BrokerB]

I thought LOP was from start of buffer tube

[AKSOG]

I thought LOP was from start of buffer tube

Nope. Its from the trigger.

[BrokerB]

Thank you

[greensoup]

There are a couple important points missing from this discussion.

The "brace" is their shoulder stock with the shoulder pad removed and replaced with a different pad which they call a "brace".

The brace has a longer length of pull than the stock.

The rails lock out.

I believe "brace" is fixed to the rails.

This was never even remotely legal. They didn't put even the tiniest effort into making a brace that would pass inspection. Literally using their stock and then calling it not a stock? Wtf?

[DrjonesUSA]

There are a couple important points missing from this discussion.

The "brace" is their shoulder stock with the shoulder pad removed and replaced with a different pad which they call a "brace".

The brace has a longer length of pull than the stock.

The rails lock out.

I believe "brace" is fixed to the rails.

This was never even remotely legal. They didn't put even the tiniest effort into making a brace that would pass inspection. Literally using their stock and then calling it not a stock? Wtf?

All that SHOULD matter (in an ideal world) is that it's a perfectly Constitutional firearm.

[Mac Attack]

I just got my F1 approved yesterday for my SBR which took 33 days from submission to approval. I have a few other pistols with braces but I think what is happening with the Honey Badger will make braces illegal very soon. So I submitted another form 1 this afternoon. Once that one clears I am selling off my braces.

[OCEquestrian]

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

Yup... everyone who bought one did so as a work around on Calif. restrictions on SBR's. It should surprise no one that you all got called on it.

[tenemae]

Here's a challenge: Find me a video on youtube where someone shoots an AR """pistol""" without shouldering it. We all know they're a loophole to own SBRs. As Milsurp said: even Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming.

If the vast majority of people owning AR pistols shoulder them, they're not pistols

But what would Heller say about this? The ATF slept while millions of back-door SBRs made their way into civilian hands. There are now millions of SBRs in common use for lawful purposes. They're just stacking the dominos for one massive cascade once the next case makes it to scotus

[Mr. Blue]

Because it looks right.


And I'll guarantee there's been no measurable increase in violence or death as a result of these braces or SBR's. So the ATF has absolutely NO rational reason to go after the HB, SBR's, or braces. It's purely leftist anti-gun ideology.

[madjack956]

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.

I love being a resident of Arizona!

[madjack956]

Here's a challenge: Find me a video on youtube where someone shoots an AR """pistol""" without shouldering it. We all know they're a loophole to own SBRs. As Milsurp said: even Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming.

If the vast majority of people owning AR pistols shoulder them, they're not pistols

But what would Heller say about this? The ATF slept while millions of back-door SBRs made their way into civilian hands. There are now millions of SBRs in common use for lawful purposes. They're just stacking the dominos for one massive cascade once the next case makes it to scotus

So, what if I put the butt of my 1911 against my shoulder and fire it, does that automatically make it an illegal SBR?

Are there laws on the books that state how and in what position you have to fire any gun?

Granted, it's not really a feasible way to shoot a 1911, but how can a firearm that was legal all of a sudden be illegal or reclassified because of the method of holding it?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[OCEquestrian]

Here's a challenge: Find me a video on youtube where someone shoots an AR """pistol""" without shouldering it. We all know they're a loophole to own SBRs. As Milsurp said: even Stevie Wonder could have seen this coming.

If the vast majority of people owning AR pistols shoulder them, they're not pistols

But what would Heller say about this? The ATF slept while millions of back-door SBRs made their way into civilian hands. There are now millions of SBRs in common use for lawful purposes. They're just stacking the dominos for one massive cascade once the next case makes it to scotus

^^^^ Winner winner chicken dinner!!!!!

So, what if I put the butt of my 1911 against my shoulder and fire it, does that automatically make it an illegal SBR?

Are there laws on the books that state how and in what position you have to fire any gun?

Granted, it's not really a feasible way to shoot a 1911, but how can a firearm that was legal all of a sudden be illegal or reclassified because of the method of holding it?

Inquiring minds want to know.

A weapon designed to be fired from the shoulder utilizing a stock is not the same as a weapon deigned to be fired held in ones hands. Game all the little scenarios you want but put a stock on a pistol so it can be fired from your shoulder and you have a different weapon. Your example is not analogous at all and you should know that. Put a stock on a pistol and you are committing a felony as well... vis a vie a WWI/II era broom handle Mauser, Artillery Luger or Browning high power slotted for a stock. A weapon designed to be fired from the shoulder is not the same as a weapon DESIGNED to be fired held in ones hands.

I dont own one and personally, I don't think they should be illegal either but they are and ya all KNEW what you were doing and finally got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. You knew the risks and you rolled the dice. Your energy and effort would be better spent keeping Republicans in the Whitehouse and Senate and turning the House red again lest we loose what little we do have...