FN Herstal Firearms banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 93 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
OPEN LETTER ON THE REDESIGN OF "STABILIZING BRACES"

The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,

Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public: concerning the proper use

of devices recently marketed as "stabilizing braces." These devices are Described as "a shooter's

aid did is designed to improve the performance of single-handed shooting buffer tube equipped

pistols. "The device claims to enhance accuracy and reduce felt recoil to When Using AR-style

pistol.

These items are Intended to improve accuracy by using the operator's forearm to Provide stable

support for the AR-type pistol. ATF has Previously by determined did attaching the brace to a

firearm does not alter the classification of the firearm or firearm subject to the National Firearms

Act (NFA) control. HOWEVER, this classification is based upon the use of the device as designed.

When the device is redesigned for use as a shoulder stock on a handgun with a rifled barrel under

16 inches in length, the firearm is classified as a firearm Properly under the NFA.

The NFA, 26 USCS § 5845, defines "firearm," in relevant part, as "a shotgun having a barrel or

barrels of less than 18 inches in length "and" a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16

inches in length. "That section defines both" rifle "and" shotgun "as" a weapon designed or

redesigned, made ​​or remade, and Intended to be fired from the shoulder .... "(Emphasis added).

Pursuant to the plain language of the statute, ATF and its predecessor agency have long held did

a pistol with a barrel less than 16 inches in length and attached to shoulder stock is a NFA

For "firearm." Example, in Revenue Ruling 61-45, Luger and Mauser pistols "having a barrel of

less than 16 inches in length with attachable shoulder stock to affixed "were each classified as a

"Short barrel rifle ... within the purview of the National Firearms Act."

In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF-considered the objective design of the item as

well as the Stated purpose of the item. In Submitting this device for classification, the designer

Noted did

The intent of the buffer tube forearm brace is to Facilitate one handed firing of the

AR15 pistol For Those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap. It therefore

performs the function of the buffer tube Sufficiently padding in order to reduce

bruising to the forearm while firing with one hand. Sliding and securing the brace

Onto ones forearm and latching the Velcro straps, distributes the weight of the

weapon evenly and Assures a snug fit. THEREFORE, it is no longer Necessary to

dangerously "muscle" this large pistol During The one handed aiming process, and

recoil is Dispersed Significantly, Resulting in more accurate shooting without

Compromising safety or comfort.

In the classification letter of November 26, 2012, ATF Noted did a "shooter would insert his or

her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol's grip hand-then tighten the Velcro straps for

additional support and retention. Configured ran thus, the device Provides the shooter with

additional support of a firearm while it is held shut with one hand and operated. "When strapped

to the wrist and used as designed, it is clear the device does not allow the firearm to be fired from

the shoulder. THEREFORE, ATF concluded that, Pursuant to the information provided, "the device



Page 2

-2-

is not designed or Intended to fire a weapon from the shoulder. "In making the classification

ATF by determined, dass die design objective characteristics of the stabilizing brace supported the

Stated intent.

ATF hereby confirm signal did if used as designed-to assist in stabilizing a handgun shooters while

shooting with a single hand-the device is not-considered a shoulder stock and THEREFORE 'may be

attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm. HOWEVER, ATF has received Numerous

Regarding inquiries alternate uses for this device, Including use as a shoulder stock. Because the

NFA defines Both rifle and shotgun to include any "weapon designed or redesigned, made ​​or

remade, and Intended to be fired from the shoulder, "any person who redesigns a stabilizing

brace for use as a shoulder stock makes a NFA firearm When attached to a pistol with a rifled

barrel under 16 inches in length or a handgun with a smooth bore under 18 inches in length.

The GCA does not define the term "redesign" and ATF THEREFORE Applies the common meaning.

"Redesign" is defined as "to alter the appearance or function of." See eg Webster's II New

College Dictionary, Third Ed. (2005). This is not a novel interpretation. For example ATF has

Previously advised to individual did poss esses a destructive device When posse sing anti-

personnel with ammunition to otherwise unregulated 37 / 38mm flare launcher. See ATF Ruling

95-3. Further, ATF has advised did even use of unregulated flare to flare launcher and as a

weapon results in the making of a NFA weapon. Similarly, ATF has advised that, Although

otherwise unregulated, the use of Certain nail guns as weapons May result in classification as at

"Any other weapon."

The pistol stabilizing brace which neither "designed" nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock,

and THEREFORE use as a shoulder stock constitutes a "redesign" of the device: because a possessor

has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters Stating otherwise are contrary

to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.

Any person who intents to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol

(Having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18

inches in length) must first file on ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax: because the Resulting

firearm will be subject to all in provisions of the NFA.

If you have any questions about the issues Addressed in this letter, You may contact the Firearms

Ammunition and Technology Division at [email protected] or by phone at (304) 616-4300.

Max M. Kingery

Acting Chief

Firearms Technology Branch Criminal

Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,026 Posts
I think that this was locked because there was no link to anything that indicated that this came from the ATF except what the letter claimed here: http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fi...ter_on_the_redesign_of_stabilizing_braces.pdf

Until I see the letter on official ATF FTB Letterhead it is just some PDF on the internet. Until I see it from here: Home | ATF I am going to consider it what it is, just a internet PDF.

For all we know, this may an internal "working" memo that was leaked or it may just be bogus.

As an example, what the heck does this mean???


In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF-considered the objective design of the item as

well as the Stated purpose of the item. In Submitting this device for classification, the designer

Noted did

The intent of the buffer
tube forearm brace is to Facilitate one handed firing of the

AR15 pistol For Those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap.



I see a bunch errors just in these couple of lines, to mention a few. No way would the ATF legal team have allowed this to be released. And on late Friday to boot.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
The possible silver lining, here is perhaps if firearm enthusiasts can come together since we already have been building momentum for at least a few now, is to build up a challenge and sue. While it might seem far-fetched at the moment, this could lead to a challenge that could, hopefully remove SBRs from the NFA. Even under the ridiculous definition of current law, neither they nor suppressors should be there. I would be happy to frame and display my stamps on the wall as historical art.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: monsterdog

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,104 Posts
I think that this was locked because there was no link to anything that indicated that this came from the ATF except what the letter claimed here: http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fi...ter_on_the_redesign_of_stabilizing_braces.pdf

Until I see the letter on official ATF FTB Letterhead it is just some PDF on the internet. Until I see it from here: Home | ATF I am going to consider it what it is, just a internet PDF.

For all we know, this may an internal "working" memo that was leaked or it may just be bogus.

As an example, what the heck does this mean???


In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF-considered the objective design of the item as

well as the Stated purpose of the item. In Submitting this device for classification, the designer

Noted did

The intent of the buffer
tube forearm brace is to Facilitate one handed firing of the

AR15 pistol For Those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap.



I see a bunch errors just in these couple of lines, to mention a few. No way would the ATF legal team have allowed this to be released. And on late Friday to boot.......
I was sceptical as well. No date, etc. until I found it directly on the ATF's website.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,026 Posts
So we are paying these guys $100K a year to write this stuff? They need to go back to school and learn how to compose a letter utilizing proper English.

So nothing has changed. If you use it as designed, you are OK.

If you use it from the shoulder, it is a stock and is a SBR, maybe, that is today's stand, which can change tomorrow, and probably will.

Slippery slope and eventually some one will challenge it in the court system.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
124 Posts
No doubt. Horrible English in several places. I would think that any publicly released letters from the ATF or other bureaucracy would be proofed by at least one if not more peers in that dept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
876 Posts
The whole Sig brace thing has always been illegal to use as a shoulder stock if you read the actually law vs opinion of an ATF agent! This whole thing is so dumb! Can someone with common sense fix the law so SBR's are not NFA items. 16" vs 14" vs 10"???? As Hillary Clinton once said "What difference does it make?

what-difference-does-it-make-meme-generator-what-difference-does-it-make-ee8d52_zps7f4cd1051.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Justin, there is a letter floating around that states that misusing it doesn't change classification. Another letter states that if you INTEND to build a firearm for using the brace correctly, you're ok. The second letter in no way adresses the first. Look around the web, they're out there.

Edit: lol quoting Clinton, somehow, I don't think she would agree XD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Yesterdays letter says it supersedes any and all previous letters and those all are now NULL & VOID!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
What I find weird but fair is where last letter did say If u bought a Sig Pistol with Brace then u could shoulder it! Some had talked about just buying a Sig pistol and shoulder it but no more!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
I could swear I remember the BATFE being referred to as a 'Regulatory agency' when I read about them in reference material in the past-now all current description by the web refer to them as a 'Law enforcement agency'---should we also refer to them as 'legislative and Judiciary authority' since it appears they can interpret as well as enforce the law? Nothing new here, but deserves being repeated...and questioned.
This coming from a guy who owns no AR pistols or braces.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLyon and Spilz

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I keep reading about the huge sale of Sig Braces going on at Arfcom many are guaranteed to have never been Shouldered!:lol::-D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,981 Posts
I would have sold mine but I'm always on iPad idk if I can post pics from it. Actually have several things to sell perhaps I need to get on a PC lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Everybody is getting really scared, even Mac on the Mil. Arms Channel vids of Mac shooting with a Sig Brace are now Private and he put up a Facebook Post how he was wrong in his Vid about the Brace of a few days ago!

Some are even calling him Chicken.:lol::-D

So who here is selling their Brace?????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,363 Posts
What brace? I ain't seen no brace!

Everybody is getting really scared, even Mac on the Mil. Arms Channel vids of Mac shooting with a Sig Brace are now Private and he put up a Facebook Post how he was wrong in his Vid about the Brace of a few days ago!

Some are even calling him Chicken.:lol::-D

So who here is selling their Brace?????
 
1 - 20 of 93 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top