Brace or stock?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You need to go back and reread the statement of mine that you quoted. Slowly this time. No where did I state that arm braces were invented to get around the SBR regs. I also did not challenge the original intent, only some of the claims of the original intent. Again, I don't have a problem with you or anyone having an arm brace or a bump stock. But don't make believe that the majority of those sold are for disabled vets and that the majority of folks are not using them as a substitute for a shoulder stock. I would be interested to know what percentage of these braces are actually bought and used by disabled vets as opposed to vet's or non-vets without any form of disability. This is where I'm coming from.
You said you had a problem with the false claims. I pointed out the only false claims are that arm braces are nothing but work arounds. To be clear, I've read many posts on various gun forums that claim this.

I have yet to see any place selling arm braces claiming they are all outta stock.
Currently, no. In the past, yes. Particularly the SBA3. I haven't seen many offered with a real discount. "Street" pricing, yes. Steep I-Can't-Pass-This-Deal-Up discounts, no. Supply does seem to be catching up with demand.

Take a deep breath and step down from your soapbox.
Why? I'd rather see everyone get fired up and defend our rights. All too often folks on gun forums are too willing to accept another restriction "because the government might change their mind!"

No one here, certainly not me has said anything about taking them or any other gun right away, from you or anyone else.
Sometimes it's hard to tell who is on what side. If you're not against them, why speak out like having one is a sin? Reminds me of folks who say "I'm not trying to take your rights away, but I see no need for an assault rifle (sic)."

I also don't have any desire to yuck your niece's yum and basically have no idea what her yum is. Maybe you could enlighten me.
I can't help but think you're being obtuse. It's another way of saying "Don't rain on my parade", "Don't harsh my buzz", "Don't be such a wet blanket" or "Stop the hand-wringing and enjoy life". Not that hard to figure out.

I have constantly stated in this thread that I am all for folks using and owning arm braces, if otherwise not prohibited. My problem is folks claiming they are not a replacement for a shoulder stock, or that many folks are not trying to circumvent the SBR regs set about in the GCA of 1934, with their use.
How can arm braces be a circumvention of the law when the ATF has given them their full blessing? Even so, why worry about it? Does this circumvention cause civil upheaval? Attack the very foundation of our society? Cause drunkeness? Lead wanton destruction? Open the door to anarchy? Erode family values? Encourage lewd and lascivious behavior? Promote teenage smoking?
 
Attaching a shoulder stock to a pistol (other than certain original Mauser C96, Luger, Browning-High Power, etc considered curios and relics) is still considered making an SBR. Pretty sure there is no question there. But consider: ATF considers an original C96 with shoulderstock as a Title I (GCA) pistol, curio and relic, and not a Title II SBR (NFA).

Use of an arm brace either as an arm brace or a shoulder brace does not appear to be a major enforcement concern for the ATF.
Occassionally ATF firearms technology branch may look at the intent of Congress where the wording of NFA, FFA and GCA are wonky.

IF I were to buy an AR-15 pistol with an arm brace, and only use the arm brace as a counterweight for balance (like the counterweight/length extensions used on UK-legal 12" barreled 24" overall "pistols"), not even using the brace and tube for arm, cheek, or shoulder support, should I have to worry about ATF descending up on me? I don't think so.
 
I agree with you and we can and should stand firm without resorting to violence. Americans can do this by banding together and get involved at the voting booth, campaigning, donating time & money and running for office ourselves. We need to clean up the mess at the NRA, not abandon it. We don't need to win every race, but we do need to be a big enough influence the politicians cannot afford to ignore or simply placate us.

You're right. I've been advocating this for a while, but nobody seems to want to put the time and effort into it. Voting is a fine thing to do, but political activism is what will save our rights. The RKBA should never have become a political issue, but it happened in the late 50s early 60s when the American left started using it. It gained steam when the American right didn't counter and started writing the Fudd playbook. The answer for this is a strong RKBA platform in BOTH parties, but I'm not sure if the left's orthodoxy will allow it, or the right can get past being too terrified to stand for it. I believe that the answer if to make sure there is no antiRKBA contingent in either party. It will take years, but can you imagine it? No appetite in ANY county executive committee for anti gun position. Now obviously, we couldn't get EVERY county, but we can make it so difficult that this is not seen as a cheap win anymore.
 
I’ve worked in three different gun shops since 2012, all of which carried and sold many arm braces and stabilizer braces, and pistols already equipped with them from the factory. With every single customer who discussed the subject with me, their stated intent was to avoid SBR laws and to shoot it from the shoulder. I haven’t had a single customer ever tell me that they intended to use their pistol brace as an actual brace. Maybe some did, but they didn’t mention it to me.

So in my seven years of experience I’ve observed that the point of a pistol brace for the vast majority of my customers is to have a firearm that functions similarly to an SBR without going through the NFA process. Is that a circumvention of the law? I suppose that depends on semantics. That said, I’m all for it; I love it when gun manufacturers and gun owners come up with ways to legally get around some of the ridiculous gun laws we have in this country. Whether it’s the arm brace, the Mossberg Shockwave, or the ways that gun companies have worked around the various “assault weapons” bans in this country; I love it when innovation manages to lessen the negative impact of various gun control measures. Now, even better would be if we could work together to reverse those gun control measures entirely, but that’s a subject for a different thread.
 
Last edited:
You said you had a problem with the false claims. I pointed out the only false claims are that arm braces are nothing but work arounds. To be clear, I've read many posts on various gun forums that claim this.

Theohazard's post above of his experiences, mirrors mine, that the majority of folks are using the arm brace as a "work around". Again I don't have a problem with their use, just that folks need to be honest about why they have 'em. Like the majority of folks that have high capacity mags. It's not really about the TEOTWAWKI, or defense against anarchy, it's about shooting a whole bunch of rounds off, really fast. Again, no problem if that's what you like.

I can't help but think you're being obtuse.

Not as obtuse as continuing to claim I'm trying to take away your rights just because I said there's no real difference between a stock and a brace. That was the question presented by the OP and the one I attempted to answer. Not whether or not I thought they were the sin of the world as you claim. One can support the right of others without having to participate themselves. Many gun owners that do not hunt, support the right of us who do. Is that any different? No.

How can arm braces be a circumvention of the law when the ATF has given them their full blessing? Even so, why worry about it? Does this circumvention cause civil upheaval? Attack the very foundation of our society? Cause drunkeness? Lead wanton destruction? Open the door to anarchy? Erode family values? Encourage lewd and lascivious behavior? Promote teenage smoking?

As I said previously, I don't care...me thinks you need to follow your niece's advice. The ATF stance on braces is as such......
“With respect to stabilizing braces, ATF has concluded that attaching the brace to a handgun as a forearm brace does not 'make' a short-barreled firearm because … it is not intended to be and cannot comfortably be fired from the shoulder.”
.

Not exactly a "full blessing', only confirming they are not supposed to be intended to be shot from the shoulder, yet there is clear evidence many have that intention. Many I have seen even have a curved butt plate, that is clearly meant to be shouldered. Yet, put a strap on 'em and they are a brace. Again, I have no problem with braces and don't really agree with the regs about SBRs. Yet.....you want to read something between those lines as me being against them. The internet is a place where sometimes it's hard to get your point across. My point is and always has been, that in my opinion, there's not a significant difference between a pistol brace and a pistol stock, and as such if one is allowed, then the other should be too.
 
I bought an AR pistol one day on a whim....I didn't NEED it, and I certainly didn't HAVE to put a brace on it either.....but I did. Its more or less a range toy, something to have fun with, and nothing I had even a remote interest in registering it as an SBR. I have it because I can, and because I wanted it. That's all the justification I think one needs. You can define it as you want to, but the feds call it is pistol, and the support I've added as a brace. Anyone elses definitions or "excuses" for their existence are really meaningless.
 
. Like the majority of folks that have high capacity mags. It's not really about the TEOTWAWKI, or defense against anarchy, it's about shooting a whole bunch of rounds off, really fast. Again, no problem if that's what you like.
Wow.....not even close. I own dozens of Glock mags, 15 round and above. Dozens of 30 round AR mags, too. Know why I buy the 15 and 30 rounders? Because they're STANDARD capacity in the free world, they're the most commonly produced/available, and they're cheap. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with "shooting a lot of rounds of real fast". Its simply today's marketplace and technology. Why is it people are so presumptious about why others own what they own? Why do you care? why is it your concern or business? and who are you to make assumptions about total strangers based on your personal beliefs, not theirs?!?!
 
Wow.....not even close. I own dozens of Glock mags, 15 round and above. Dozens of 30 round AR mags, too. Know why I buy the 15 and 30 rounders? Because they're STANDARD capacity in the free world, they're the most commonly produced/available, and they're cheap. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with "shooting a lot of rounds of real fast". Its simply today's marketplace and technology. Why is it people are so presumptious about why others own what they own? Why do you care? why is it your concern or business? and who are you to make assumptions about total strangers based on your personal beliefs, not theirs?!?!

Even as so called "STANDARD capacity", the whole intent is to shoot a lot of rounds really fast. And I don't care. It's my business because I too am a gun owner. I'm not making any assumptions, just expressing my opinion, no differently than you. Only difference is, I ain't gettin' my panties in a wad over yours because it is different. Kinda what these forums are all about, especially when the topic of the thread is "Brace or Stock". While I support your right to own and use a "Brace or Stock" and High Capacity mags, I'm not gonna rip your head off and spit down the hole because we don't agree why the majority of folks have 'em. I'm just gonna make the assumption we have a difference of opinion and move on. Don't make a whole lot of sense to pound one's chest and make a scene over, especially when the other person is in support of your rights.
 
When you state your opinion as though it IS fact, you can expect others that disagree to state as much. You can argue the reason you THINK "most people" own hgih capacity mags, but stating your opinion as fact invites debate, does it not? Its ok to have an opinion, no one is arguing that. But when you unequivocally say something is fact, when its anything but, is rather silly. No panties in a wad here, just calling out misconceptions as I see 'em....
 
NO! The intention is to NOT be wasting time loading magazines on the range that charges by the half hour.
Hell,I have my own private range, and I don't like wasting the time I spend there reloading magazines. Range time, free or paid, is for shooting:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top