ATF Policy on "handgun" stabilizing braces.

[RKlenka]

I remember at least Sigs first braces looked like it was designed to stick a hand through them as well as not looking all that comfortable to shoulder. Some of these later designs from different groups try to mimic the original SBR look that I figured it was only a matter of time before someone ruins it for the rest of us.

[srothstein]

I have a much larger problem with this ruling than I have seen mentioned anywhere else so far. Well, anywhere except on a satire site (duffel blog I think) and they applied the logic of my problem without ever stating it.

This is a really bad legal precedent to set. So far, the design of the object, including any physical modifications, has always been the determining factor in whether a device was regulated or not. Yes, they have always said that if I had a collection of parts that could be assembled, I had a regulated weapon but even that is a function of the design of the parts.

This is the first time that the actual use of something, without making any change in the physical design, is the determining factor on regulation. Does this mean the ATF agent or police officer has to see me shoulder it? Or could they say someone saw me do it and therefore my possession is illegal? Or the fact that I could shoulder it means it is regulated?

As the blog mentioned, if I have an AR pistol without a shoulder brace, but with a 30 round magazine, do I have a pistol or an SBR or AOW? Remember that a vertical foregrip is one of the determining factors on that question. If I put my second hand on the magazine, is it now a vertical foregrip?

One time use is a very poor factor for determining if the item is forever a regulated item or not. And it is very bad precedent to set now.

[K.Mooneyham]

I have a much larger problem with this ruling than I have seen mentioned anywhere else so far. Well, anywhere except on a satire site (duffel blog I think) and they applied the logic of my problem without ever stating it.

This is a really bad legal precedent to set. So far, the design of the object, including any physical modifications, has always been the determining factor in whether a device was regulated or not. Yes, they have always said that if I had a collection of parts that could be assembled, I had a regulated weapon but even that is a function of the design of the parts.

This is the first time that the actual use of something, without making any change in the physical design, is the determining factor on regulation. Does this mean the ATF agent or police officer has to see me shoulder it? Or could they say someone saw me do it and therefore my possession is illegal? Or the fact that I could shoulder it means it is regulated?

As the blog mentioned, if I have an AR pistol without a shoulder brace, but with a 30 round magazine, do I have a pistol or an SBR or AOW? Remember that a vertical foregrip is one of the determining factors on that question. If I put my second hand on the magazine, is it now a vertical foregrip?

One time use is a very poor factor for determining if the item is forever a regulated item or not. And it is very bad precedent to set now.

Sadly enough, it probably won't matter much until someone is arrested for this "crime", and suffers through the pain and indignity of it. We can only hope that if and when that day comes, there will be enough money and attention to mount a proper defense and put this stupidity to rest.

[Jumping Frog]

Just so there is no misinterpretation of where I stand, I personally think the entire NFA and GCA are unconstitutional and should be wiped out. However, I am also a realist and understand we have to live within the reality of current laws or potentially face the overwhelming weight of the federal government.

That said, The definitive ruling is in ...

The brace is OK if used as designed. If you get caught putting it up to your shoulder, you have "redesigned" your pistol into a SBR, and you may be committing a felony.

I wonder if several YouTube videos will suddenly disappear.

That bottom line is that ATF letter does not say anything about sales, and in fact, it says the opposite:

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. *** The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.

I may not like the ruling, but I like the way it's stated. Personal accountability. No more pleading ignorance and scraping off responsibility on the seller. And that's why statements made in YouTube videos could be inculpatory.

[poppo]

It will take someone getting arrested or a law suit to sort this out. These BATF letters are opinions and not actual law. The actual law, wording and definitions need to be decided by a court, not by some random desk jockey.

[JSThane]

I seem to remember another letter from the ATF some years back which opined that a shoelace and keyring were an unregistered machine gun. That one was walked back rather quickly.

These letters reflect the thoughts and opinions of the desk jockey that wrote them, not actual law. They -may- provide basis for an arrest and prosecution, especially when wielded by an ignorant cop and/or an over-zealous DA, but ATF's had to recant them before, and the letters themselves have no force of law.

I think I might just finally have to build myself an AR pistol, just to put one of these braces on it, now.

[LAYGO]

At the range this weekend, I saw one of these SB15 braces being shouldered while my friend talked to the owner & then allowed my friend to fire that same pistol . . . shouldered. I walked over & asked if he had seen the latest ruling listed here & he claimed to only have the letter that came with the brace. He didn't seem at all interested in this latest letter . . . and fired at least another 100 rounds + shouldered.

I bought one for my AR pistol that I'll be building soon enough, but I don't think I'll ever be firing this in public w/the brace on.