I believe this says it is illegal to shoulder a "Stabilizing Brace"

[james83]

The only thing this new letter changed is you probably shouldn't let anyone video or photograph you shoulder firing your pistol. Other than that it's business as usual like others said.

 

[Bryan]

I disagree, Bryan. I have attempted to be a "law abiding citizen". I tried to build an AR pistol that not only allowed me to shoot right handed, and blind in my right eye, but also allow me to travel with my pistol across state line without BATFE approval. I spent hard earned money conforming to the BATFE rules, only to have my Sig braced pistol to be condemned by the very government agency that allowed it one week before.

it does not seem that they're saying the braces anything wrong they're saying using it as a shoulder stock is illegal. if you're using it as designed you're within your rights and more power to you. but let's be fair most people are buying it to use as a stock.

 

[Bryan]

when the law is altered out of opinion by unelected bureaucrats, i am inclined to follow the original law (see the 2nd amendment)

the law itself has not been altered. having the brace, installing the brace, using a brace are still legal. Using the brace as a shoulder stock is not. If some of you want bring a case in front of a judge or jury. more power to you.

 

[Adam5]

Why do you have to do anything?

 

[Slostang]

[Broken External Image]:

 

[mikeyE]

I seriously doubt that ATF will dedicate a lot of time or resources to arresting anyone shouldering a Sig Brace. As for local LE! Why stomp on piss ants when your up to your ass in alligators.

I can tell you that local LE could give two sh!&s whether you shoulder a sig brace.

 

[spencer60]

Is there any other area of ATF rulings where how you use the item is the deciding factor on whether it's legal or not? I'm not expert at all but I couldn't think of one off the top of my head. In all the cases I've seen you have to make some physical change to the firearm to make it NFA.

If they had ruled that the SIG brace was really a stock, it would be pretty black-and-white. But from what I'm seeing this new opinion just opens up a huge can of legal worms.

For example, Slidefire stocks were also approved as a way for the disabled to use a firearm. Does this mean that using it to simulate machine-gun rates of fire is illegal? Are they going to publish an opinion letter stating that using it is OK only if you are disabled, otherwise it has to be registered as a machine gun?

 

[chucklenut]

the law itself has not been altered. having the brace, installing the brace, using a brace are still legal. Using the brace as a shoulder stock is not. If some of you want bring a case in front of a judge or jury. more power to you.

im not one to acquiesce to the logic of bureaucrats simply because it is "legal"

im not a fan of having my rights micromanaged. and of course the idea of the stabilizer was to use it as a stock, just like the atf regulations are supposed to slowly strip americans of their rights. of course their justification for why SBRs and what not should remain regulated is well........actually i dont think there is a good point, but the "law" is on their side

 

[mtdawg169]

Interesting ODT just happens to shut down for upgrades the same day the ATF reverses their brace stance. Where's my tinfoil?

Coincidence? I think not!

 

[rax_wall]

Well I'm not taking my brace off. I've never shouldered it anyway I will however change the direction on my next build!