ok, but just as shouldering a brace is making it a SBR
18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(29) and 27 CFR § 478.11. The term “
Pistol” means a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having: a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); two handing a pistol makes it an AOW (if the idea is use, not intent at manufacturer)
Shotguns are destructive devices- just with a "sporting exception" that can be revoked.
The JD and ATF don't seem to have a definition of "engaged in the business of" and as we have seen recently, you only have to sell one firearm to the wrong person to be an illegal dealer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emissions_Standards_Act Looks like i got the date wrong, the law was 65, but took effect in 68.
My point is that if you go after people for intent of the law rather than word of the law, every adult in the US is committing a felony on a frequent basis. To your point, we already have the law. The law is clear. SBR's are SBR's, Pistols are pistols. If you bridge that gap we have a technology department at the ATF. Is simply unreasonable to expect federal legislative action for every new idea in a fast moving industry. The people in a position to make a ruling made a ruling based on what they had, knowing the legislator would not consider the issue. They have been given the responsibility for that very reason.
The actual issue is only confusing because to many people pushed the ATF like children, and made it a political flashpoint.
The Honey badger probably got banned because its a $2400 pistol that can be replicated for 1/2 the price, and this is a way to see if the Fudds will throw the very small market under the bus like they did the bumpstock crowd. If so, they'll start making more rulings, and eventually limit stock designs severely, maybe request legislative review. If not, things will probably stay the same.
As for the 5.45, import law is much simpler. If there was demand, lawyers would have fought it, or a US maker would take over. The 5.45 really died out because the 5.56 is everywhere, continuously produced and the most popular centerfire round in the US. Demand for the 5.45 was never that great to begin with. I don't think banning everything from the XP-100 to Heizer defense 223 is a great idea. Making model exceptions is a stupid idea, and always has been.
Millions of pistols have been made in 22lr. Thousands in 44-40, both rifle rounds. What happens when we decide a rifle round is anything for a rifle?
Rifle cal pistols have been around for decades. Never an issue. They didn't go after the .223, or .308, despite lots of pistols. They went after the 5.45 because the objectors were minimally influential, and we were made at Russia at the time.
