ATF open letter on the redesign of “stabilizing braces”
- Thread starter dogtown tom
- Start date
May I ask a stupid question. . .When did the ATF get in the business of issuing letters?
Case law defines the written meaning, limitations and clarifies misunderstandings.
How can the ATF put themselves in the role of LEO and judge? They have way overstepped their bounds in doing this. What if they take me to court for 2 handed firing of my 1911? . . .or using the SIG brace as a rifle stock? The court may not agree with the BATFE letter or no letter. I would think the courts would be quite bothered by the letter game. The BATFE is trying to tell you how the court will rule.
Wonder how they determined the SIG brace to be legal? Was it out of concern that SIG had the influence and resources to force the issue?
Case law defines the written meaning, limitations and clarifies misunderstandings.
How can the ATF put themselves in the role of LEO and judge? They have way overstepped their bounds in doing this. What if they take me to court for 2 handed firing of my 1911? . . .or using the SIG brace as a rifle stock? The court may not agree with the BATFE letter or no letter. I would think the courts would be quite bothered by the letter game. The BATFE is trying to tell you how the court will rule.
Wonder how they determined the SIG brace to be legal? Was it out of concern that SIG had the influence and resources to force the issue?
Double Naught Spy
New member
Well, they are in the roll of LEO already. All the letters state is how they interpret the law and what the parameters on which they feel they can act. So if you are using the arm brace as a shoulder stock with a receiver having a sub 16" barrel, then don't be surprised if you are charged. Doesn't mean it will hold up in court. That hasn't been seen yet.
This sort of interpretation happens all the time when new laws come out. The law enforcement community, sometimes with the help of lawyers, have to determine what the law means as best they can and then enforce what they think the law to mean. There is no case law until a cases goes to court.
Congress delegated to them the power of regulation. Same as the EPA and DOT. That way Congress isn't slammed changing and updating specific law all the time about details that only someone with long experience and professional certification can make.
They skipped out on the responsibility and this is what we are left with, agencies who not only write regulation with the force of law, but are also appointed to police it, too.
Is that Constitutional?
They skipped out on the responsibility and this is what we are left with, agencies who not only write regulation with the force of law, but are also appointed to police it, too.
Is that Constitutional?
Hillbilly Jim
New member
The problem is we [gun people] rubbed their noses in this use of the arm brace. Tv programs showing shoulder fired arm braces, u-tube, gun writers in gun mags saying this was a lot cheaper than a tax stamp, etc etc.
Thumbing your nose at the man will get you and everyone else in trouble.
I hope they withdraw this letter, but i doubt it.
Thumbing your nose at the man will get you and everyone else in trouble.
I hope they withdraw this letter, but i doubt it.
Evil Monkey
New member
LOL I keep telling people this is risky business, they don't listen.
Risky for who?
The ATF isn't going trolling to arrest thousands of brace users. They don't have to - almost every "gun Nazi" at a range or out in the field will do the job for them just to exercise their ego as a know it all.
Plenty of others are in a panic attempting to hide whatever connection they ever had with one.
Not great character references in either case.
Be advised a significant number of pistol owners with or without braces have very little concern about it at all. Simple numbers - individually we are more likely to suffer injury in a car accident than prosecution for shouldering something that one letter says is legal and another says isn't. When the dust settles then it will simply offer another challenge to get around the law.
There was no reason or precedent to pass the NFA, and there's none to keep it.
In matters of legality the resourcefulness of the human mind can always invent new designs.
The ATF isn't going trolling to arrest thousands of brace users. They don't have to - almost every "gun Nazi" at a range or out in the field will do the job for them just to exercise their ego as a know it all.
Plenty of others are in a panic attempting to hide whatever connection they ever had with one.
Not great character references in either case.
Be advised a significant number of pistol owners with or without braces have very little concern about it at all. Simple numbers - individually we are more likely to suffer injury in a car accident than prosecution for shouldering something that one letter says is legal and another says isn't. When the dust settles then it will simply offer another challenge to get around the law.
There was no reason or precedent to pass the NFA, and there's none to keep it.
In matters of legality the resourcefulness of the human mind can always invent new designs.
dakota.potts
New member
I don't see this lasting if it is challenged. Redesigning a firearm by simply firing it a certain way? Does bump firing an AK turn it into a machine gun? Maybe I shouldn't give them ideas
Evil Monkey
New member
First it was legal and the ATF didn't care how you used the brace.
Now, it's only legal (non-NFA) if you do not intend to use the brace as a stock. This means as soon as the brace brushes against your shoulder, you are a FELON and can get 10 years in prison. lol
Watch next month the ATF will say if you even think about putting the brace on your shoulder it constitutes "constructive possession".
Now, it's only legal (non-NFA) if you do not intend to use the brace as a stock. This means as soon as the brace brushes against your shoulder, you are a FELON and can get 10 years in prison. lol
Watch next month the ATF will say if you even think about putting the brace on your shoulder it constitutes "constructive possession".
I have to wonder, when this comes to criminal trial, if the defense holds up two physically identical pistols with the brace and declares that one is perfectly legal and the other is punishable by 10 years in prison, the jury has to decide which is which and given no indication of how it was used by the defendant.
Or hold up a screwdriver and ask the jury what it was. If they answered "screwdriver" the defense could just say "Wrong! Its a hammer according to the ATF, because the defendant pounded some tacks in with it."
What sensible person in their right mind would entertain such ridiculous arguments.
By the ATF's standards ANY item can change its own physical design by use. I can use a rock to hold down a tarp, or I could use a rock to smash a window, is it still a rock?
"Use" in legal terms should only come into play when an item is used to infringe upon the rights of others. Like when a person uses a baseball bat to assault another person.
Or hold up a screwdriver and ask the jury what it was. If they answered "screwdriver" the defense could just say "Wrong! Its a hammer according to the ATF, because the defendant pounded some tacks in with it."
What sensible person in their right mind would entertain such ridiculous arguments.
By the ATF's standards ANY item can change its own physical design by use. I can use a rock to hold down a tarp, or I could use a rock to smash a window, is it still a rock?
"Use" in legal terms should only come into play when an item is used to infringe upon the rights of others. Like when a person uses a baseball bat to assault another person.
There is also the very real legal avenue of getting a judgment of declaratory relief: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...pistol-arm-brace-decision-declaratory-relief/
A lot of companies are at the Vegas SHOT Show and they have money in selling braces and brace equipped pistols which were predicated on the ATF's previous decisions. If anything what the ATF did was classic political manipulation - they dumped a negative PR release on the media late Friday when nobody could reply at the office, and they did it when? Just before the SHOT Show. Who else would know of exactly how many new products they themselves had to review for business plans, machinery, equipment, supplies, materials, and cash money commitment?
Every brace seems to be a SBR stamp not sold, they are the regulatory agency that not only says what is legal but also sells the stamp to make it so.
Telling businesses on one hand it's ok and then at the last minute before a national sales event to offer the products to buyers, no, is being arbitrary and capricious. And there is likely a Federal judge who would have no problem with establishing to the ATF that once again they, the judge, can make the final decision.
It's happened before, and likely a hot topic of conversation in the convention halls right now.
So crying "the sky is falling the sky is falling only one guy has to be prosecuted!" seems to be doing the ATF's work for them free. The odds of being 'that guy' is very much less than being in a traffic accident tomorrow. And the ATF looking to punish just that one guy is only going to accelerate support for him.
Which is it supposed to be - citizens afraid of their government, or a government who is obedient to the citizens who formed it? Frankly, I don't much think of those who are afraid of their government. They have already given up - which is exactly how an oppressive government stays in power.
ugh.....I never really wanted one of these, but I better hurry up and get one in case I feel the need in the future. surely it wo't be long before they are banned for sale completely, hopefully the prices don't immediately reflect the new ruling
anydifference between the gen1 and gen2 braces besides looks and 20$
anydifference between the gen1 and gen2 braces besides looks and 20$
Last edited:
marine6680
New member
Since we have two threads and the other closed... I will reply here, and just pick up where I was.
9X19:
What about pistols that have the brace installed at the factory?
They come equipped as pistols with this brace. It came as part of the design. Sure, AR pistols came before the brace, but we don't say that extended beavertail grip safeties on 1911s are not part of the pistols design when you get a factory pistol with one... just because the original design had no beavertail.
So we can establish that any AR pistol or similar setup, that comes equipped with a brace from the manufacture is set up and designed as a pistol and is legally a pistol in that configuration.
So now, simply holding that pistol incorrectly by placing the arm brace against your shoulder is illegal.
The ATF made no such distinction between assembled and factory equipped...
By their logic, taken at its face value... simply holding a pistol against your shoulder makes it a SBR. It "redesigns" the firearm, simply by the manner in which you hold it.
9X19:
What about pistols that have the brace installed at the factory?
They come equipped as pistols with this brace. It came as part of the design. Sure, AR pistols came before the brace, but we don't say that extended beavertail grip safeties on 1911s are not part of the pistols design when you get a factory pistol with one... just because the original design had no beavertail.
So we can establish that any AR pistol or similar setup, that comes equipped with a brace from the manufacture is set up and designed as a pistol and is legally a pistol in that configuration.
So now, simply holding that pistol incorrectly by placing the arm brace against your shoulder is illegal.
The ATF made no such distinction between assembled and factory equipped...
By their logic, taken at its face value... simply holding a pistol against your shoulder makes it a SBR. It "redesigns" the firearm, simply by the manner in which you hold it.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/SIG-SAUER-S...g-Brace-SIGTAC-SBX15-Gen-2/311143173924?rt=nc
just ordered the gen 2, have no use for it. I hate "panics"....I fall for them everytime'
can throw it on the 300BLK pistl, but I actually like the padded tube. maybe i'll save it for my 9mm build for the wife. looks cool anyway, kinda like the minimalist type sttocks
just ordered the gen 2, have no use for it. I hate "panics"....I fall for them everytime'
can throw it on the 300BLK pistl, but I actually like the padded tube. maybe i'll save it for my 9mm build for the wife. looks cool anyway, kinda like the minimalist type sttocks
I've been following this story quite closely over the past week and it seems like there is really no consensus on the interpretation of the letter released just before SHOT Show but a very clear interpretation of the two private letters that came before it. Of course, the speculation that the ATF acted on the most recent letter is because of the overwhelming applications they are getting for new devices seems accurate to me. I've seen all sorts of devices, some even for short barreled shotguns. Clearly, the creator of the brace device was not aware that short smoothbore ANYTHING is an AOW per the ATF already.
My take from all of this after the smoke clears is that there had to be some sort of response to the outpouring of new devices and to address the rising popularity of the Sig Arms Brace. People are rabidly building what would otherwise be SBRs with the intention of creating a legal SBR without the restrictions of NFA. Your "Get Out Of Jail" card is that your "intention" was to manufacture a pistol and use the brace as intended. I did not take the letter to interpret with a blanket statement that shouldering a pistol or any attached device would constitute an SBR, just that you should be warned against manufacturing an SBR that you intend to shoulder. The ATF's letter is telling you that if you just intend on getting around the tax stamp, you are in violation of the NFA. How they will establish your intent is, quite fortunately for you, up to them to prove.
They will not be hauling people off to court over shouldering a brace-equipped pistol but it would be a smart move not to poke the bear on the issue. After all, they won't have to enforce it as no public range with a range officer will likely let you shoulder any pistol after this letter. They wouldn't allow it because they are either ill-informed or it is a liability issue. If you build a brace pistol and never talk about your intentions with it, then I don't see any laws being broken. There is no law against the misuse of your firearm whether it be shooting it sideways, upside down, or braced against a body part or piece of furniture. For the unfortunate few of us who don't have the time or facilities to shoot our guns that much anyways, the letter doesn't change anything. If you wanted to build one to show off at the range, you may want to look into something else.
If you live in Illinois like I do, you have even less to fear. Generally, gun crimes are never charged against victims of legitimate self defense within a domicile. There is probably numerous case law supporting this, but I can recall that there is a specific court case in the eighties or nineties where a FOID violator was not charged at the behest of the Attorney General and the precedent set. I'm not a lawyer but my advice is free. Build your pistol, enjoy it, and for Kris Kringle's sake, don't post on Facebook about it!
My take from all of this after the smoke clears is that there had to be some sort of response to the outpouring of new devices and to address the rising popularity of the Sig Arms Brace. People are rabidly building what would otherwise be SBRs with the intention of creating a legal SBR without the restrictions of NFA. Your "Get Out Of Jail" card is that your "intention" was to manufacture a pistol and use the brace as intended. I did not take the letter to interpret with a blanket statement that shouldering a pistol or any attached device would constitute an SBR, just that you should be warned against manufacturing an SBR that you intend to shoulder. The ATF's letter is telling you that if you just intend on getting around the tax stamp, you are in violation of the NFA. How they will establish your intent is, quite fortunately for you, up to them to prove.
They will not be hauling people off to court over shouldering a brace-equipped pistol but it would be a smart move not to poke the bear on the issue. After all, they won't have to enforce it as no public range with a range officer will likely let you shoulder any pistol after this letter. They wouldn't allow it because they are either ill-informed or it is a liability issue. If you build a brace pistol and never talk about your intentions with it, then I don't see any laws being broken. There is no law against the misuse of your firearm whether it be shooting it sideways, upside down, or braced against a body part or piece of furniture. For the unfortunate few of us who don't have the time or facilities to shoot our guns that much anyways, the letter doesn't change anything. If you wanted to build one to show off at the range, you may want to look into something else.
If you live in Illinois like I do, you have even less to fear. Generally, gun crimes are never charged against victims of legitimate self defense within a domicile. There is probably numerous case law supporting this, but I can recall that there is a specific court case in the eighties or nineties where a FOID violator was not charged at the behest of the Attorney General and the precedent set. I'm not a lawyer but my advice is free. Build your pistol, enjoy it, and for Kris Kringle's sake, don't post on Facebook about it!