SB15 now deemed illegal to shoot from the shoulder..........

FrankT · Jan 18, 2015

I heard most of the people writing were ticked off SBR owners after paying a $200 tax were doing whatever they could to get the SB15 banned out of jealousy...no one I know with one would write asking anything...makes sense to me anyway.

TackleberryMCS · Jan 18, 2015

FrankT said:
I heard most of the people writing were ticked off SBR owners after paying a $200 tax were doing whatever they could to get the SB15 banned out of jealousy...no one I know with one would write asking anything...makes sense to me anyway.

As an SBR owner myself, it did not bother me that I paid $200 a pop to get a legal SBR. That is the right and only way to do it. The fact that these guys were basically building AR pistols that were really SBRs without the Form 1 and me paying for mine was not an issue for me. The issue was the legality of the AR pistol with the SB15 and how it was getting used. Also, if many of us have built AR pistols with just a buffer tube, why can't others do that as well? After all, it is a pistol.

FrankT · Jan 19, 2015

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...pistol-arm-brace-decision-declaratory-relief/

Not so quickly ATF

donr101395 · Jan 19, 2015

FrankT said:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...pistol-arm-brace-decision-declaratory-relief/

Not so quickly ATF

What he fails to grasp is that the ATF isn't saying you can't use these things. They are saying you can't use them in a way other than they were designed and intended. If you think that is something new you would be wrong. Spray paint is perfectly legal to buy, possess and use to paint your wagon. As soon as you huff that same can of paint it becomes illegal. Regulating how an otherwise legal device can be used is nothing new. No one is being harmed by their letter. They are saying if you use it other than for what it was designed it's illegal. It wasn't designed to be fired from the shoulder by the inventor and the manufacturer's own admission.
It was a good run while it lasted for those who wanted to use it; now get ready for a bunch of idiots to start writing letters to the ATF asking about cane tips and shouldering bare receiver extensions. I'm not saying I like it or agree with it, but it's a fact of the world we live in today.

FrankT · Jan 19, 2015

What it does say is the ATF cannot rule on use only the device, so as usual they over stepped and broke ground that has not been breached before and totally against their charter.

Seanpcola · Jan 19, 2015

I don't have a dog in this hunt but the fact that it requires this kind of debate concerns me.

TackleberryMCS · Jan 19, 2015

FrankT said:
What it does say is the ATF cannot rule on use only the device, so as usual they over stepped and broke ground that has not been breached before and totally against their charter.

The ATF has said before that they take design and intent into consideration. The SB15 was designed and intended to be used as a brace secured around the forearm of the user. It was not designed and intended to be used for a shoulder-fired weapon. This is why they have stepped in and have put a stop to using the SB15 as a stock substitute. The ATF did not bring this on, the mass of guys who taunted and flaunted the use of the SB15 as a means to have a SBR without having a Form 1 are the ones at fault. Like I have said before, the ATF said they did not recommend using the SB15 for any other purpose other than that for which it was intended when they gave SIG the approval. Now, they have dropped the proverbial hammer on the use of the SB15. It was bound to happen. There is always the multitude that can take a good thing, misuse it, and spoil it for everyone else.

donr101395 · Jan 19, 2015

FrankT said:
What it does say is the ATF cannot rule on use only the device, so as usual they over stepped and broke ground that has not been breached before and totally against their charter.

Nick Leghorn puts out at best sketchy info at worst dangerous info. He said similar things about the Ares Armor 80% receiver debacle. Here it is nearly a year later and Ares isn't doing 80% receiver parties, the company producing them for Ares is pretty much out of business and one of the Ares co-owners has committed suicide. Like it or not the ATF and DOJ with their 97% conviction rate own the cards, playing table and dealers.

I agree with Sean, this isn't something there should even be a debate about. NFA 34 should have never been held up as constitutional, but it has been and messes like this are what it has brought us. Personally I think we should without limitation be able to own, use, buy, sell and trade any weapon our finances will allow, but I live in this world and not fantasy land.

FrankT · Jan 20, 2015

I think the ones writing are the SBR crowd, gun owners against other gun owners is a sad thing..First of all we should all know the NFA is against our rights carries onerous rules and should be repealed. The SB-15 should be a reminder of that fact and all should get behind the repeal of the NFA for SBR's and suppressors.

Little Jack · Jan 20, 2015

seanpcola said:
i don't have a dog in this hunt but the fact that it requires this kind of debate concerns me.

bingo!!!

TackleberryMCS · Jan 20, 2015

FrankT said:
I think the ones writing are the SBR crowd, gun owners against other gun owners is a sad thing..First of all we should all know the NFA is against our rights carries onerous rules and should be repealed. The SB-15 should be a reminder of that fact and all should get behind the repeal of the NFA for SBR's and suppressors.

Frank, I do not think what you are saying is necessarily true about the SBR owners. As an SBR owner, I could care less whether or not you, or anyone else for that matter, have a SB15 on your AR pistol or not. What I do care about is following rules and regulations. When the SB15 came out, I knew there was going to be issues. I read the letter of approval and every letter afterwards. SB15 owners were basically warned in polite language to not use it differently from how it was designed to be used. Plain and simple as that. Now, I am just as anti-NFA as the next guy, but until things change, as far as the laws are concerned, the ATF will continue to make the necessary regulations and the decisions in regard to them. I do agree that SBRs and suppressors should be removed from the NFA list and eventually many other items as well. Until this happens, we still have to follow the rules regarding them. Nobody is exempt. For those that are in denial and defiance of the latest decisions, that is their choice. If they want to continue at their own risk, then they are playing with fire.

FrankT · Jan 20, 2015

Great, glad we agree..it just seem the SBR guys are celebrating the misfortune of the SB15 guys and it is unseemly. Just because you did not write does not mean others did not. After watching the comments from some on this and other forums, there is just not much doubt.

Daezee · Jan 20, 2015

When the initial rulings came out, the SBR owners in my circle of shooting friends encouraged other non-SBR owners (in the same circle) to get a brace to have more shooting fun. I am a SBR owner and bought a brace myself. As someone else said, "get some popcorn and enjoy the (brace) show".

donr101395 · Jan 20, 2015

FrankT said:
Great, glad we agree..it just seem the SBR guys are celebrating the misfortune of the SB15 guys and it is unseemly. Just because you did not write does not mean others did not. After watching the comments from some on this and other forums, there is just not much doubt.

Let me guess, we're all going to end up in FEMA camps too. Come on Frank, I've been on forums long enough and so have you to see morons post about writing letters "because they don't want to pay $200, but don't want to end up in prison either". Then you have youtube personalities like HossUSMC putting up videos talking about how great it is to skirt NFA laws with the SB-15 and throw it in the ATF's face because "there is nothing they can do about it". Those are the people that got what was a good thing squashed.

All of that said, letting it divide us isn't the right answer either. I've been behind turning back gun laws to pre-1934 since I was a teenager, but being realistic I'm doubtful it is ever going to happen so the best I can hope for is to not erode them any further and work within the guidelines we currently have while working to make it better.

Snow Bird · Jan 20, 2015

I don't have any of the stuff you guys are talking about but this is one of the best threads that has been on here in a long time. Watching guys skirt the rules,want to change the rules,doing alittle ranting, I love it.

donr101395 · Jan 20, 2015

Because things like this help alot.........

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhTw3Vq-cpk

dogamus rex · Jan 20, 2015

Shot my buddies SBR today, mistakenly put it too my shoulder and pulled the trigger, does that make it "Intent" or did it just feel better to shoot it that way.Looked around after doing that but no ATF jumped out of the woods. Guess I'm OK this time.

FrankT · Jan 20, 2015

YOU are in big trouble! LOL

JohnAL · Jan 21, 2015

A Statement Regarding the SIG SAUER® Pistol Stabilizing Brace.

NEWINGTON, N.H. (January 21, 2015)—SIG SAUER, Inc., has issued the following statement about the recent opinion by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in regard to the SB15 and SBX pistol stabilizing braces.

“As reaffirmed in an Open Letter by ATF’s Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division dated January 16, 2015, the Pistol Stabilizing Brace (SB15 and SBX) is legal to own, legal to purchase, and legal to install on a pistol. SIG SAUER® believes that the PSB improves the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped pistols, and offers the product both as an accessory and pre-installed on a number of pistols.

“The Open Letter goes further to rescind a previous private letter regarding the ‘intent’ of the user of the pistol stabilizing brace. In the letter of January 16, 2015, ATF opines that a person’s actual use of the product as a shoulder stock can change the legal classification of the product. However, the Open Letter explicitly states: “ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm.”

“We question ATF’s reversal in position that the classification of the brace may be altered by its use. We are reviewing the legal precedents and justification for this position, and will address our concerns with ATF in the near future.

“We will vigorously defend the classification of all of our products and our consumers’ right to use them in accordance with the law. If we find that the open letter opinion is outside the scope of the law, we will seek further review.”

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/01/21/sig-makes-statement-batfe-pistol-brace-controversy/

flyandscuba · Jan 21, 2015

I've gotten to the point where I could care less what big government and the ATF says... Fortunately, up here in the last frontier ATF agents are few and local LEOs don't seem to be looking to take away Alaskan's firearms.

If we really end up in a true SHTF situation - I doubt anyone's primary concern will be how uncle ATF interprets the way you are holding a firearm when you are protecting you and yours from the horde of thugs coming to take your stuff...

Please read the new forum rules! REQUIRED!

Click Here: https://www.gulfcoastgunforum.com/threads/general-forum-rules-code-of-conduct.70770/

SB15 now deemed illegal to shoot from the shoulder..........

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States

Member Benefits:

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Moderator

Master

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

Master

Master

Master

Master

6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer

Master

Master