I checked out a "pistol" with arm brace in the gun store.
- Thread starter kcub
- Start date
I know a guy who had two or three of them. Funny, my first impression upon shouldering his gun was, "Geez, I feel like I'm getting away with something", and sure enough, a few months later, I'd be a felon if I shouldered the gun again.
I don't know anyone who used them as arm braces, though I suspect it has happened, somewhere.
I don't think it's a big hassle to remove and reinstall them, but removing it from an AR wouldn't make the gun much more compact, as you'd still have the buffer tube extending from the receiver.
I don't know anyone who used them as arm braces, though I suspect it has happened, somewhere.
I don't think it's a big hassle to remove and reinstall them, but removing it from an AR wouldn't make the gun much more compact, as you'd still have the buffer tube extending from the receiver.
Thanks to the NFA 1934 (and regulatory interpretations since) a handgun with a stock is a regulated firearm, the same as an SBR or a "sawed off shotgun"
Other than allowed curio & relic guns, if a "stock" or brace is attached to the gun, it is not legal without the Federal registration, tax stamp, etc.
I've shot some of the curio&relic stocked pistols, and while it seems, on the surface, to be a good idea, there are reasons NO military uses them today, and even the ones used during WWII were "leftovers" from an earlier age.
The joint between the pistol and he stock is rather flimsy, and while this isn't a huge obstacle in deliberate slow fire, it does have an effect on everything else one might do with the gun.
Also, the stock puts the sights, AND the muzzle closer to your face than the normal arms length hand hold does. Again, might not matter to some people, but might, to others.
For me, I was no more accurate with the stocked gun than the unstocked gun, from a good rested position. YMMV.
A brace (which is not attached to the gun in any way) is still legal, as far as I know.
Other than allowed curio & relic guns, if a "stock" or brace is attached to the gun, it is not legal without the Federal registration, tax stamp, etc.
I've shot some of the curio&relic stocked pistols, and while it seems, on the surface, to be a good idea, there are reasons NO military uses them today, and even the ones used during WWII were "leftovers" from an earlier age.
The joint between the pistol and he stock is rather flimsy, and while this isn't a huge obstacle in deliberate slow fire, it does have an effect on everything else one might do with the gun.
Also, the stock puts the sights, AND the muzzle closer to your face than the normal arms length hand hold does. Again, might not matter to some people, but might, to others.
For me, I was no more accurate with the stocked gun than the unstocked gun, from a good rested position. YMMV.
A brace (which is not attached to the gun in any way) is still legal, as far as I know.
I thought about building an AR pistol but after a lot of research I didnt want to get caught up in the "here today , gone tomorrow" BATF rulings inconsistencies. I think the AR pistol will become one of those "flavor of the month" occurrences. Kinda like the rocket evolvment and fall of 300 BLK.
Last edited:
dakota.potts
New member
The ATF didn't really say it's not legal to shoulder the pistol with a brace... what the letter pretty much said was that it was illegal to put it on the pistol with the intent of using it as a stock. What that means in terms of enforcement and where they stand legally is really a guess at best. I had an ATF agent tell me (off the record, of course) that they know people are shouldering them and that if you have to use one to defend yourself nobody is going to take the time to ask whether you shouldered it or why, but that people making an issue out of it or committing another crime will have it used against them.
So, don't buy one with the intent of using it as an SBR. Shouldering it probably isn't good practice but whether or not it's technically legal depends on who you ask. A lot of people "cheek" it instead.
I've handled a few and while I appreciate the idea, nothing about them (whether strapped to the wrist or used as a makeshift stock) seemed comfortable or ergonomic to me. Maybe some of the products besides the Sig are better about that.
So, don't buy one with the intent of using it as an SBR. Shouldering it probably isn't good practice but whether or not it's technically legal depends on who you ask. A lot of people "cheek" it instead.
I've handled a few and while I appreciate the idea, nothing about them (whether strapped to the wrist or used as a makeshift stock) seemed comfortable or ergonomic to me. Maybe some of the products besides the Sig are better about that.
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
... ... ???
I don't see AR pistols going anywhere soon. They clearly fit within the legal definitions of a pistol and I don't see those being revised in the near future. The arm braces aren't on steady ground, but there are a whole lot of them out there now. Like the bump stock s I don't see ATFE being able to reel that one in with any ease.
I like that. It's perfectly legal to have it on your gun, as long as when you installed it, you didn't intend to put it against your shoulder.
Even if you never put it to your shoulder, never shoot the gun at all, it's illegal because you intended to put it against your shoulder.
Shows how stupid, and how dangerous it is to have non-accountable government agencies interpreting and enforcing - or not, on a whim - the law.
I'd better not even look at another wrist brace, as the only thing that comes to mind is, "Hey that looks like a buttstock", and you know what you do with one of those?
Theohazard
New member
Yes they did, they said exactly that in this ruling. Here's an excerpt from that ruling:dakota.potts said:
Here's an article regarding the subject:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/01/16/sig-brace-no-go-per-atf/
That was the ATF's previous ruling on the subject. The most recent ruling superseded all previous rulings and said that shouldering a pistol with the brace made it into an illegal SBR.dakota.potts said:
dakota.potts
New member
Crazy. I wasn't aware they had changed the ruling again
This is exactly why these things scare me.
You buy something that's legal one day and then they could go change the 'interpretation' and it's not.
Maybe they'll be nice and we'll all get a memo when that happens.
All they have to do is change their 'opinion'.
They've done it before. Romanian PSLs were recalled from people that already owned them because suddenly the ATF decided that a third hole in the receiver made it a machine gun. It's irrelevant that even military PSLs are not and never were full auto.
stagpanther
New member
I built a 300 BLK pistol and love it. Until you have one and have used it you'll never be able to really appreciate one. Can I live without it? sure, but it's a spectacular weapon in a very compact package IMO. I got the sig brace and was able to shoot MOA at 100 with it--took it off and could not do so. The key things that makes mine legal are that the stock extension tube is smooth and has no holes that could be used to fix the stock in different positions--and I keep the stock flush up against the back of the receiver. I turn the brace slightly to the side so it braces off the elbow joint and I can shoot almost as well as I imagine would be possible using it against the shoulder--the only difference being that it involves a bit of slightly awkward craning of the neck to get a good sight picture--and hence why I suspect the ATF still regards them as legal.
stagpanther
New member
I thought about that--but I really like the smaller package--plus I can legally hunt with it with a full magazine holding more than 5 rounds, whereas I could not with an SBR or rifle--so that sorta clinched it for me.
So yes, there are states that don't allow NFA items.
I just shoot mine without a brace or shouldering.
Just make a cheek weld on the tube the same as any other AR. Is really not as hard to shoot as some think. You do have to deal with recoil a bit differently.
Not really any less accurate,
I just shoot mine without a brace or shouldering.
Just make a cheek weld on the tube the same as any other AR. Is really not as hard to shoot as some think. You do have to deal with recoil a bit differently.
Not really any less accurate,
The Buffer tube is irrelevant to legality. BATFE has said that ANY buffer tube may be used on a "Pistol" build. The Sig brace under discussion will only fit on a smooth tube anyway.
I have a cpl of the braces on guns I have not gotten around to doing Form 1's on yet. The brace is not as nice as a true SBR, even when you could shoulder them.
stagpanther
New member
Strictly speaking, maybe not--but the latest ruling holds that any configuration that can be construed as supporting an intended use of an extended stock--that could consequently possibly be used as a shoulder stock--could be interpretated as illegal. However nebulous that sounds, ruling "intent" as being illegal leaves the door open to potential interpretation of a stock extension that supports adjustable stocks-- IMO-- leaves you vulnerable to legal action.
There are other pistol braces that do support positioning adjustability.
Exactly. I have an AR pistol, .357 SIG, 9 inch barrel. I had thought about getting a "brace" for it but I had been using it with the buffer tube and rubbery tube cover for a long time with no problems. So I just never got around to it.
For a very compact little beast that can easily get hits out to 150 meters, it works. And I have bazillions of rounds of .357 SIG + once fired brass.
Gregg
FrankenMauser
New member
Back to the beginning...
As soon as you add the SB15 arm brace, the whole "light weight" concept goes right out the window. The brace, alone, weighs over 12 ounces (advertised weight - mine actually weighs 15 ounces).
My 7.5" barreled pistol weighed just a hair under 7 pounds with the SB15 installed, and it used 'average' parts (nothing overly heavy, nothing made to be 'ultralight'). I have 16" barreled complete AR rifles that weigh less - including a .458 SOCOM!
And, even with 'extended length' pistol tubes to mount the brace, you end up with a length of pull for the 'stock' that isn't very useful, anyway.
If you want light weight and a useful 'stock', pay for the tax stamp and build the real thing - an SBR.
As for my arm brace...
It's a paper weight. I dropped that crap like a bad habit, after realizing just how annoying and excessively heavy it was.
It's collecting dust in the corner of my gun room.
Legalities aside (they've been discussed plenty)...
As soon as you add the SB15 arm brace, the whole "light weight" concept goes right out the window. The brace, alone, weighs over 12 ounces (advertised weight - mine actually weighs 15 ounces).
My 7.5" barreled pistol weighed just a hair under 7 pounds with the SB15 installed, and it used 'average' parts (nothing overly heavy, nothing made to be 'ultralight'). I have 16" barreled complete AR rifles that weigh less - including a .458 SOCOM!
And, even with 'extended length' pistol tubes to mount the brace, you end up with a length of pull for the 'stock' that isn't very useful, anyway.
If you want light weight and a useful 'stock', pay for the tax stamp and build the real thing - an SBR.
As for my arm brace...
It's a paper weight. I dropped that crap like a bad habit, after realizing just how annoying and excessively heavy it was.
It's collecting dust in the corner of my gun room.