dogtown tom
Member
I was responding to his post above where he made several inaccurate statements....How is it going to get someone in trouble?
I was responding to his post above where he made several inaccurate statements....How is it going to get someone in trouble?
I reiterate the question. How are those statements going to get someone in trouble?I was responding to his post above where he made several inaccurate statements.
Most everybody's pistol ARs seam overpriced I'll second the build your own.CMMG makes quality stuff. But their full firearms tend to be overpriced for what they are. Which is why I recommended building your own. You typically spend less money in the long run when you build your own AR.
I already pointed out the problems.I reiterate the question. How are those statements going to get someone in trouble?
No, you didn't, hence the question, three times now.I already pointed out the problems.
I feel I did, but I'll write it so you can hopefully understand.No, you didn't, hence the question, three times now.
No, you didn't, hence the question, three times now.
I fully understand the NFA and have been living with it for about 40 years now. Dealt with the ATF on a fairly regular, face to face basis for a number of years too.
You seem to be missing my point about "whats the difference" because THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE, if they allow you to shoulder a brace, then how is it any different than shouldering the same gun with a stock on it? THERE IS NONE! I don't care how the law reads, it is what it is. Im not saying it isn't. Im simply saying it needs to be challenged and addressed.
I understand the "law" says one thing, but I don't understand when they obviously conflict in their rulings, how they can stand, and they arent challenged. You cant have it both ways, the SBR laws should go away, because there is no difference between shouldering a stock, and shouldering a brace. So BASICALLY, shoulder a brace is no different than shouldering a stock. How hard is a that to understand? Seems it must be pretty hard, because I seem to have to keep repeating it.
Same thing goes for the Shockwave type shotguns. There is no difference, but there is a difference. What a crock.
Another thing that really pisses me off is, people who get all holier than thou about obviously unconstitutional "rules", and bend over backward to try and get everyone to follow them. Those people are enablers. I understand they are "the rules", and we should follow them, the best we can, especially with the ATF constantly flip flopping at a whim, but we should all also be AGGRESSIVELY doing everything possible to repeal ALL the unconstitutional gun laws, not try to appease those who want to take our rights from us.
There is nothing there that I said that is "wrong". I, and from what Ive seen, so is everyone else with a brace on their guns these days, is following what the ATF stated. Why do you think everyone and their brother has a brace on their guns now? Its not to strap it to the arm.
They did issue a letter that the braces couldn't be shouldered, and then they changed their minds, and said they could, where is the letter that they now say that ALL braces are in violation? All Ive seen is one company did something that pissed someone off and they got a letter telling them to stop. Whats the disposition of that now? Since youre so sure its wrong, where is the letter now saying that its illegal to shoulder ALL of them again? The fact that it might be just one, just makes things even more untenable and ridiculous.
I guess I'll have to ask elsewhere for answers to my original post questions.
Your best bet is to ask in the AR15.com dedicated AR15 pistol forum else you'll get a lot of interference and noise from the anti pistol and brace crowd.I guess I'll have to ask elsewhere for answers to my original post questions.
I didn't ask about inaccuracies, real or imagined. I asked how would it get someone in trouble. In your rush to show us all how smart you are and let us know we are just flies in your spider world, which seems to be more modus operandi, you didn't really do that. There's no trouble to get in putting a brace on a pistol, rifle or shotgun. The only thing one could do in this context to get themselves in trouble, is to install a buttstock on a pistol without an SBR stamp. Nowhere did anyone here suggest doing that.I feel I did, but I'll write it so you can hopefully understand.
Please show the officer where dogtown tom touched you.I didn't ask about inaccuracies, real or imagined. I asked how would it get someone in trouble. In your rush to show us all how smart you are and let us know we are just flies in your spider world, which seems to be more modus operandi, you didn't really do that.
"A "pistol" with a brace that "can be shouldered" by the ATF's own admission, is no different than a SBR with a stock."There's no trouble to get in putting a brace on a pistol, rifle or shotgun. The only thing one could do in this context to get themselves in trouble, is to install a buttstock on a pistol without an SBR stamp. Nowhere did anyone here suggest doing that.
Sure there is.As far as the functional difference, there really isn't one.
Youre still taking things out of context, or at least manipulating them."A "pistol" with a brace that "can be shouldered" by the ATF's own admission, is no different than a SBR with a stock."
"If you can shoulder a brace, why cant you have a stock on the gun?" .
Sure there is.
"arm braces" are limited in LOP, real shoulder stocks are not.
I would like to see a reference to that. If it’s legit then I will make sure mine is at least 1/8” shorter, but I have never seen or heard that and doubt ATF would ever publish such a thing. Not that they wouldn’t go by it, but it makes too much sense to be clear and concise about the rule therefore ATF could not possibly be responsible.attach an arm brace with a "length of pull" over a certain amount and ATF no longer considers it an arm brace. Didja think of that???
Those are direct quotes........I'm not taking anything out of context.Youre still taking things out of context, or at least manipulating them.
They are direct quotes, but you are trying to manipulate the context/meaning that Ive already explained. I guess it must be over your head, so I wont bother to try anymore.Those are direct quotes........I'm not taking anything out of context.
At one point ATF said it was 13.5"....now it's on a case by case basis.I would like to see a reference to that. If it’s legit then I will make sure mine is at least 1/8” shorter, but I have never seen or heard that and doubt ATF would ever publish such a thing. Not that they wouldn’t go by it, but it makes too much sense to be clear and concise about the rule therefore ATF could not possibly be responsible.
And they've already backed off those, IMHO it's because they know the difference is arbitrary and has zero to do with function and it would lead to SBRs being removed from NFA.At one point ATF said it was 13.5"....now it's on a case by case basis.
Here's an article thats sums up some of the criteria ATF might use: https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/...ach-firearm-considered-on-case-by-case-basis/
Is the gun on top have a LAW folding stock ? I run the SB Brace in the cheapest version that just presses on to "your" length , which in my case is 121/2 " LOP for all around indoor CQB outdoor up to 200 yard tactical use on my old , but revamped Noveske Pistol . I was thinking of adding a LAW folding adapter but I think it adds a bout 1 1/2" so I would be heating and beating the SB tactical one down that much farther , but end up with a smaller folded package.IMHO, best thing since sliced bread!
View attachment 986581
In particular, this version of the SB Tactical brace has become my favorite. I had three Shockwaves like the one on the Scorpion above and stopped using them.
View attachment 986582
How is it going to get someone in trouble?