ATF change of postion on SIG brace

[bwframe]

Not to hound, but fixing or killing the NFA is the solution. Everything else is bandaids and loopholes that can be changed on a whim as is evidenced in this thread.

We seem to have survived all the major gun control waves. After the Supereme Court decision and before Newtown the talk was to remove supressors from NFA, hinging on safety issues. What is the NRA, GOA, etc, pushing for now?

 

[Excalibur]

I think we should all still get the brace and the Thorsden and keep it and never take it to the range, nor post pics of it or talk about it until the ATF reverses again. Just OWNING something with the brace isn't illegal and only shouldering it MIGHT be illegal but...if we do it in the comfort of our homes, windows closed...who's gonna tell?

 

[tradertator]

I think we should all still get the brace and the Thorsden and keep it and never take it to the range, nor post pics of it or talk about it until the ATF reverses again. Just OWNING something with the brace isn't illegal and only shouldering it MIGHT be illegal but...if we do it in the comfort of our homes, windows closed...who's gonna tell?

With that logic, why not just put a stock on it? According to the latest letter, there would be no difference.

 

[TheUziButton]

And now a word from Tripple B regarding the ATF and the Sig brace...
[video=youtube_share;XNBbXAoWRz0]http://youtu.be/XNBbXAoWRz0[/video]

 

[Excalibur]

And that's all the clarification I need to still get the brace

 

[Beowulf]

Looks like Sig has issued a statement about the ATF letter today:

BREAKING: Statement from SIG SAUER About ATF Pistol Brace Ruling - The Truth About Guns

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.”

 

[ACC]

Looks like Sig has issued a statement about the ATF letter today:

BREAKING: Statement from SIG SAUER About ATF Pistol Brace Ruling - The Truth About Guns

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.”

YEAH!!! GO SIG SAUER!!!

 

[Trigger Time]

Go sig!!! Sue the **** out of them

 

[Beowulf]

Another interesting article about the Sig Brace fiasco.

This article recounts the conversation between Alex Bosco (inventor of the brace, who licensed it to Sig) and an ATF rep at SHOT show.

ATF: We Changed Our Minds On the Brace Because People Kept Sending Letters - The Truth About Guns

Some key statements from the article:

According to the ATF agent Alex spoke to (while B. Todd Jones was standing behind him listening intently, we hear), the reason why the ATF decided to reverse its original decision is because they received so many letters asking about the legality of using the pistol arm brace. As Alex said later, that statement is very troubling as it indicates that the ATF is basing their ruling and their decisions not on the law or the technology but instead on mob rule.

The ATF agent reportedly went on to say, in no uncertain terms, that the pistol arm brace Alex designed was not the only device impacted by this letter. Alex asked about other pistol devices like cane tips, padded buffer tubes, and cheek weld adapters. According to the ATF agent that he spoke to, all of those items are also subject to the same classification if used by placing the gun to the shooter’s shoulder.

I attempted to verify this information, but the agent I spoke with told me the complete opposite: that the letter applies only to the pistol arm brace and nothing else. When I asked further questions (“why doesn’t this apply to other items with similar functions?) the agent refused to speak further and asked for my information, claiming I would be contacted “after lunch” by a PR person who was “out getting their computer fixed.” I was never contacted, and no other employees were willing to speak to me on any topic.

 

[Trigger Time]

Ha! Yeah. Please give us tie contact info sir so we can get righ back to you on this ....... With our swat team. No thanks

 

[Trigger Time]

I'm sure they just wanted to send a fruit basket and an atf key chain

 

[JTScribe]

Ruh roh . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-lOxrO4PZk