Forum Thread

Sig Sauer SBX Gen 2 Pistol Stabilizing Brace $64.98 Shipped A.C gunmagwarehouse.com

kromix 643 599 September 19, 2016 at 07:48 PM in Guns & Ammo (5)
Deal
Score
+6
1,596 Views
See Deal
$64.98

Thread Details

Last Edited by kromix September 20, 2016 at 07:04 AM
http://gunmagwarehouse.com/sig-sa...brace.html

Sale Price $59.99
- 5% coupon (GMW16) = $56.99
+ 7.99 2-3 day priority shipping
= $64.98 shipped
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
Want more deals like this? Create a deal alert for Guns & Ammo. Add Deal Alert for Guns & Ammo

10 Comments

1

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#2
Ironically I commented on a similar product a few years ago on SD, when I was looking for products to use a semi-auto in a larger round with a permanent rotator cuff injury. From the title then I thought that it might help with my infrequent off-hand pistol shooting. I ended commented that these are useless for aimed shooting of a pistol as the forearm brace would only really work if shooting from the hip one handed, and that their only intent (as shown by that manufacturer's video) was to try claim an AR-15/M4 with certain impractical hardware was a pistol, and then by adding this circumvent the SBR (short barrel rifle) laws by de facto making one, but claiming it is still a pistol.

Turns out I was right, or at least ATF and several State Governments have cracked down on them - which is very germane to the deal. While I really dislike the ludicrous extremes both sides are using to enforce/abuse the rules on these - do your research. The law on these things is constantly shifting, and I'd hate for someone here to get caught like the fellow did in Indiana for inadvertently violating in his case Straw Man Purchase regulations (yeah, he was sorta dumb - OK really dumb - about it but there was no criminal intent). Look at the most recent issues on these so-called Pistol Stabilizing Braces, and make sure the potential hassle and legal issues (how you hold the gun could put you in prison depending on the jurisdiction) are worth it.

BTW not intended as an argument over the SBR rules, but a headsup that these could land you in severe legal trouble. Since this is purely a case of regulatory interpretation - imagine what will happen with that "interpretation" if there is a large scale shooting with one of these. Note even Scalia voted to overturn the Federal Laws on SBR's, so just be forewarned this issue will not simply go away no matter who is elected unless much of the National Firearms Act of 1934 is repealed.

BTW I have a friend who is working on his firearm instructor certificate in LEO, so this is not just some anti-gun crap but info I've gleaned from his helping me on practical concealed-carry issues, i.e. how to use a pistol in emergency off-hand situations when I have a bum shoulder. We concluded a 9mm semi-auto works just fine, but I'm not going to be able to control a .45 ACP properly even though before the injury I had no trouble the one time I tried a long-barreled .44 magnum revolver on a range that a very nice fellow enthusiast let me try. However, as my friend put it - "So what, sunshine, it's about the shoulder you have now." Blush
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#3
Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
imagine what will happen with that "interpretation" if there is a large scale shooting with one of these.
What if there's a large scale shooting involving comfortable shoes, will we be destined to suffer hammer toes and calluses?

When a piece of plastic on the wrong end of a firearm alters the terminal ballistics of the projectile, let me know and I'll use one to take out the pigs flying overhead.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#4
nice find but illegal in CA
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by shamshizel September 20, 2016 at 12:52 AM
Joined Sep 2009
L8: Grand Teacher
3,141 Posts
1,154 Reputation
#5
I don't think it's correct to say the ATF has "cracked down" on these.... they simply clarified their legal use.

They remain (outside of CA, which is a CA thing not an ATF thing) completely legal to own and put on a pistol.


Exactly zero people- ever- have been arrested for just for using a pistol brace as a pistol brace.


Here's the only thing that "changed" regarding the ATF...

In 2014 the ATF in response to an inquiry letter said this:

Quote from in fire :
rms accessories such as the Sig Stability Brace have not been classified by [ATF] as shoulder stocks and, therefore, using the brace improperly does not constitute a design change, Using such an accessory improperly would not change the classification of the weapon per Federal law.

In other words- you could use put the brace up to your shoulder like a stock, and it still was totally fine.



Then in 2015 they changed their minds on the shouldering thing and the ATF instead said:

Quote from The ATF :
"The pistol stabilizing brace was 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"

Meaning they are still completely legal to purchase, own, and mount on a pistol if used as designed and intended.

Or as the ATF themselves wrote in the most recent open letter about it-

Quote from The ATF :
ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun 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
You can read the ATF letter here-

https://www.atf.gov/file/11816/download



TL;DR= Item is entirely legal (federally, but not in CA) to own and attach to a pistol. But only for its intended use as a brace, NOT as a shoulder stock.


So if someone "catches" you with a brace mounted on a pistol, there's no risk whatsoever of legal problems- because that ain't illegal and never has been.

The only legal risk would be someone catching you using the arm brace as a shoulder stock- since that use of it is not legal.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#6
Quote from Knightshade View Post :
...
So if someone "catches" you with a brace mounted on a pistol, there's no risk whatsoever of legal problems- because that ain't illegal and never has been.

The only legal risk would be someone catching you using the arm brace as a shoulder stock- since that use of it is not legal.
OK - I may not have put it well, but I believe the point I stressed was how your hold the device could put you at risk - so the device is not banned by the ATF, but the way they are used by over 90% of the purchasers use it is illegal. Confused. Your post appears to minimizes these risks, though they did reinforce my point even more and establish that it is nationwide - you CAN be arrested on SBR charges for the "improper" use of this stock.

Two problems. First, before this "work-around" was discovered by people wanting an SBR, sales for devices to help those with injuries or handicaps causing problems with shooting were a very small market. The number of sales over the last three years are massively beyond any such market..
http://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/...sig-brace/

Secondly - mechanically, you understand that this goes onto the AR-15 "pistol" just like a normal stock. Straight line. Now plant the flat plate against the arm (from the pistol) anywhere. The only way to do that is with the arm crooked fairly close to 90 degrees from barrel (i.e. the long axis) of the gun, as that is how it is configured. Now try to do that one or two handed with a pistol. The only way to do that practically is to have the elbow bent roughly at the waist, and to be handling the "pistol" like some spaghetti Western shootout. Since the butt plate configuration at the end has no practical application, there was no need to make it like that except so that it can be used as a butt plate, i.e. turning the "pistol" into a SBR.

Now instead imagine the hole in the bottom of the butt pad of the adapter (which of course cannot be used as butt pad or you will be in violation of the law) over your forearm, the purported stabilization usage of these things. OK, now hold your arm in a standard one or two handed shooting stance (trust me, having a firearms instructor shooting errors with a pistol - I come from the hunting side of things - has made me very aware of technique).

The only way this thing works is if you have the arm it is attached to, locked/straight both up and down and side to side at the wrist. Plus you have to be holding it at shoulder level to have a clear sight-line down the long axis of the firearm. There may be some minor adjustments to this to get the only functional lining-up of everything, but there will be only one very narrow configuration. You might have to have the elbow very slightly bent for example, it just depends on how the adapter geometry works with your body measurements.

The ONLY geometrically possible exception would be that the wrist could be bent laterally (side-to-side) if the butt-plate-that-is-not-a-butt-plate of the adapter rotates in a circle, which does not appear to be the typical usage but there could be an exception (which I haven't researched, as you'll understand further on as it is next to useless). However, then it's also going to create an even more inflexible stance as any vertical motion of the forearm will rotate the hole and thus the "brace" that goes over the forearm in this purported usage.

If the hole/"adapter" butt plate can rotate around the forearm, then the sighting axis of the firearm tilts. As the hole rotates the long axis will tilt at the pistol grip, both tilting the long axis in the opposite direction of the adapter hole, and changing the horizontal angle and slewing the end of the rifle again, in the opposite direction pivoting again around the pistol grip. There is a reason the company that was selling them a couple of years ago that was linked on SD was only showing in the company video being shot from a ridiculous, one-arm straight configuration for a couple of seconds, while for several minutes they discussed how this was legal, and proceeded to spend several minutes using it from a pick-up truck cab as essentially an urban warfare SBR.

I've posted on how much I find the gun elimination lobby's ridiculous definition of a "assault riflte" which is almost purely a cosmetic issue (remember when the "Assault Gun ban" that would have included Revolutionary War reenactment rifles with plug bayonets?). This device is the same type of issue, trying instead to use a cosmetic makeover and standing on the "disabled" or "handicapped" label to shut down any close legal examination. I'm don't have much sympathy for either.

As I mentioned reference the guy who made a Straw Gun purchase inadvertently. He ended up in prision. Your update on the legal interpretation makes having one of these very foolish. If someone makes a cell phone video of you using this as a stock on an AR-15 type "pistol", and inadvertently posts, or someone with an agenda sees it and posts it, or if it gets auto-posted, or if that phone gets lost/stolen/hacked - you can go to prison, or at least have a very expensive legal bill if ATF decides to make you the example. So while purchasing one might still be technically legal - maybe it's a bad idea for the vast majority of people out there. If it had truly been for "handicapped" individuals, there would have been vertical and horizontal adjustment to the forearm brace, and there would have been no need for a butt plate, and that in fact could have incorporated the adjustment mechanism. The intent of this design is very clear by what it does NOT do.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by Mr. Harley September 20, 2016 at 02:07 PM
Joined Sep 2009
L8: Grand Teacher
3,141 Posts
1,154 Reputation
#7
Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
OK - I may not have put it well, but I believe the point I stressed was how your hold the device could put you at risk - so the device is not banned by the ATF, but the way they are used by over 90% of the purchasers use it is illegal. Confused. Your post appears to minimizes these risks
Mainly because it's a minimal risk.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
, though they did reinforce my point even more and establish that it is nationwide - you CAN be arrested on SBR charges for the "improper" use of this stock.
Can you cite anyone, anywhere, ever, who was arrested for this?


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Two problems. First, before this "work-around" was discovered by people wanting an SBR, sales for devices to help those with injuries or handicaps causing problems with shooting were a very small market. The number of sales over the last three years are massively beyond any such market..
In what way is that a problem?

On the contrary it's caused improvements in such devices, which are then a help to the disabled.

That's a benefit, not a problem.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Secondly - mechanically, you understand that this goes onto the AR-15 "pistol" just like a normal stock. Straight line. Now plant the flat plate against the arm (from the pistol) anywhere. The only way to do that is with the arm crooked fairly close to 90 degrees from barrel (i.e. the long axis) of the gun, as that is how it is configured. Now try to do that one or two handed with a pistol. The only way to do that practically is to have the elbow bent roughly at the waist, and to be handling the "pistol" like some spaghetti Western shootout. Since the butt plate configuration at the end has no practical application, there was no need to make it like that except so that it can be used as a butt plate, i.e. turning the "pistol" into a SBR.
There's tons of videos of people using the SIG brace properly without problems, so this doesn't really hold up to real world use...

Further, there's other braces that can be even easier to use (KAK Shockwave for example doesn't use straps and is smaller if you seem to be having trouble with the end piece of the Sig one to cite one example)



Further, while you can't shoulder either brace, you can use it as a cheek weld point (since that's legal on pistols too, and the ATF is very clear it's only SHOULDERING that's an issue with the brace).... which is another added bit of comfort compared to trying to do that with a naked pistol buffer.




Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
The only way this thing works is if you have the arm it is attached to, locked/straight both up and down and side to side at the wrist. Plus you have to be holding it at shoulder level to have a clear sight-line down the long axis of the firearm. There may be some minor adjustments to this to get the only functional lining-up of everything, but there will be only one very narrow configuration.
Again this is demonstrably false- there's a ton of videos showing people shooting with the brace NOT on their shoulder with no problem... including with the brace strap on AND with it used as a cheek weld....and there's more than one brace on the market now with different sizes/configs on top of that.



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
This device is the same type of issue, trying instead to use a cosmetic makeover and standing on the "disabled" or "handicapped" label to shut down any close legal examination. I'm don't have much sympathy for either.
This device was actually invented by a veteran specifically to help a disabled friend of his... something your own link mentioned that you appear to have missed... so your suggesting that was not the real original purpose is.... not factually correct.



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
As I mentioned reference the guy who made a Straw Gun purchase inadvertently. He ended up in prision.
Yes- because straw purchases are illegal.

Owning, mounting, or properly using this brace isn't.



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Your update on the legal interpretation makes having one of these very foolish. If someone makes a cell phone video of you using this as a stock on an AR-15 type "pistol", and inadvertently posts, or someone with an agenda sees it and posts it, or if it gets auto-posted, or if that phone gets lost/stolen/hacked - you can go to prison

You are making less and less sense as you go on...


"If you use it illegally you could get in trouble- so it's foolish to even OWN it!"

That's your argument.

Which is also true of any gun. Or car. or baseball bat. Or basically any object in the world.

The trick would be- don't use it illegally.

There's multiple LEGAL uses for it after all, and OWNING it isn't illegal at all (outside CA).


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
[I]If it had truly been for "handicapped" individuals
Again... it was. Your own source even admitted that.

Increasingly it sounds like you've never actually seen or used one of these in person.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#8
Quote from Knightshade View Post :
...
Increasingly it sounds like you've never actually seen or used one of these in person.
Now, since you've chosen a reverse order to discredit me, let's try being factual. First, I posted on what I believe was the first deal on a similar device after watching in detail the manufacturer video kindly included with that OP. I WANTED the device to work for me for other issues. I clearly stated that, yet since we have come to heavily divergent conclusions you resort to "He obviously is lying. He cannot have seen these since he drew a different conclusion."

That device had exactly the aiming issues I discussed. It sounds like you do NOT understand the point of what I was describing, and I noticed you do not rebut any single one of the aiming/geometry issues I describe for using it one handed in any of the standard pistol stances.

That's because you cannot, they are a SERIOUS problem, unless you are using this to turn a so-called AR pistol into a carbine. It's a two handed "pistol" that cannot, with this adapter, possibly be fired practically one-handed. So it's a two handed weapon that you hold to your cheek instead of your shoulder. Since you hold it to your cheek instead of your shoulder, it magically is a pistol and not carbine. vomit

Quote :
Again this is demonstrably false- there's a ton of videos showing people shooting with the brace NOT on their shoulder with no problem... including with the brace strap on AND with it used as a cheek weld....and there's more than one brace on the market now with different sizes/configs on top of that.
OK - and there you show that you freely admit this is deliberate blurring of the definition between a rifle, SBR, and a pistol. Just for jollies I googled "cheek weld" and "pistol". That is a term only used for the AR so-called pistols. So in an effort to get around the SBR laws you hold it mostly like a rifle, including a cheek weld (I'll grant you that's a clever use of words, except - I've never heard of cheek weld EXCEPT with rifles and shotguns) but let's magically not touch our shoulder.

Quote :
This device was actually invented by a veteran specifically to help a disabled friend of his... something your own link mentioned that you appear to have missed... so your suggesting that was not the real original purpose is.... not factually correct.
And the link also talked about how the huge increase in sales has no relationship to the number of handicapped shooters. This from a review that states it is biased towards these devices.

So let's get this straight. They market this device for handicapped shooters, when it cannot possibly work one-handed - which BTW you never address. Also note the purported problem was due to lack of control by the handicapped shooter of an AR-15 "pistol", which is already playing fast and loose with the legal definition of pistol vs. rifle. The article which I note states the designer states that as his reason for designing it, which is suspect given the initial marketing and sales of these devices.

So now it's for handicapped shooters using it for "two handed" shooting of an AR - pistol, which is carefully only cheek-welded but never touches the shoulder so it magically is no longer a pistol.

Oh, and the sales vastly outstrip the target market, and the ATF who are the legal authority on this have started cracking down, implying that there IS a problem - after all these are the people who enforce these laws. That after a shotgun manufacturer was exploiting the same loophole (yes, that's also in the article if you bothered to read it). I guess you would support the existence of a "shotgun - pistol". Note a home defense shotgun is still a long arm, and is appropriately regulated that way.

BTW besides my own handicap, the individual I purchased my Weatherby .300 magnum (I'm a southpaw and at the time this was one of three companies marketing non-custom left-handed bolts) had all of the fingers missing from one hand, and most from the other. Handling a long arm when handicapped is not the monstrous, onerous deal you seem to be portraying. However, using something designed as a rifle as a pistol when handicapped might just possibly be a less than sterling idea. Just like me trying to shoot my Weatherby on my bad shoulder after I tore it all up.

Quote :

Owning, mounting, or properly using this brace isn't. (sic - illegal)
Except that making an inadvertent mistake means you are no longer "properly" using it, i.e. cheek weld vs. letting it touch your shoulder. We all know that nobody ever makes an inadvertent mistake. I worked in a safety-related field for over 20 years - anything that can "inadvertently" be used incorrectly, because it closely resembles a standard piece of equipment will not get certified for those reasons. Admittedly, this is not safety related like proper protocols on a firing range, but the concept is the same - except in this case you can end up in prison, instead of shooting someone or crashing an aircraft.

Quote :
"If you use it illegally you could get in trouble- so it's foolish to even OWN it!"

That's your argument.

Which is also true of any gun. Or car. or baseball bat. Or basically any object in the world.
Not true, and a poor misrepresentation of the facts. The minor shifting of the "non-butt plate" (FYI pistol with a butt plate - that already show an intention to blur the distinction between a long arm and a pistol) takes it from "legal" to "illegal". That's absurd.

There has been an very hard movement, among a small minority of 2nd amendment "enthusiasts" (or "extremists" depending on your bent) to push the limits of the various Federal Firearms laws. The simply existence of a "two-handed cheek welded pistol" shows problems (not my opinion, the ATF involvement shows the people tasked with the enforcement of those laws were having problems, too), as were the legal fictions that were attempts to get around the laws on background checks and special licensing for automatic weapons and sound suppressors. Anytime someone says something is "technically legal" (not your selected term, but definitely the spirit of your arguments) means they know they are skirting the edges of the law (as the ATF fully understood with their "clarification"). Again, rebut that the ATF got involved if you want to argue whether this is or is not pushing the limits of the appropriate legal terms.

I am all for a discussion about these laws, and honestly - some of the arguments about using suppressors during hunting I found intriguing, though the proponents cannot make a compelling argument about how this could make poaching very difficult for Game Wardens to catch, just like some LEO's have argued against any legalization of Cannabis due to the difficulty of enforcing DUI laws. You just couldn't resist though, using emotional labels to "discredit" someone who disagrees, while selectively ignoring the physics of the utter impracticality of using this device one-handed.

BTW I didn't realize how differently we were looking at things until you used the term "cheek weld" with pistol, which made me realize your intentions. All the geometry issues go away if you never use it one handed, which you conveniently ignore since to your two-handed cheek-welded pistol is "legal". The problem is, and I watched this happen with the stupid "assault rifle ban" - if instead of obeying the law as it was intended, you (as in 2nd amendment activists) can create a backlash that results in the majority deciding the laws have to "tightened" to stop individuals from exploiting so-called loopholes. Ironically, while gun control activists exploit emotional labels, it's people who hide behind "it's a two-handed only cheek-welded firearm is still technically a pistol" who cry foul, without realizing that is a major reason arguments against "assault rifles" succeed in the public sphere.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 1
Last edited by Mr. Harley September 20, 2016 at 11:31 PM

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#9
does this mean that, according to the atf, if i rest the back of the slide on my shoulder I've created an SBR?

but in all seriousness this kind of thing is why pro gun people are so fed up with regulations that don't actually stop crime.

this must be the shoulder thing that goes up.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#10
Good deal.

That is all.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Sep 2009
L8: Grand Teacher
3,141 Posts
1,154 Reputation
#11
Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Now, since you've chosen a reverse order to discredit me, let's try being factual. First, I posted on what I believe was the first deal on a similar device after watching in detail the manufacturer video kindly included with that OP. I WANTED the device to work for me for other issues. I clearly stated that, yet since we have come to heavily divergent conclusions you resort to "He obviously is lying. He cannot have seen these since he drew a different conclusion."
I didn't say you were lying.

I said you don't appear to have ever actually used the device in person- and your statement above seems to confirm that.

I have. It works a lot better, and more easily, than you seem to think it does from your having only ever watching internet videos of it.

That's not you "lying" that's you being poorly informed on the very thing you're trying to discuss.

Go hit a local gun show, there's tons of pistols with braces there so you can actually try one yourself and see it works better than you think it does.

Not only that- again, there's DIFFERENT models that work/feel different- another thing you seem to have been unaware of.





Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
That device had exactly the aiming issues I discussed.
Well not really, no....because again if you've watched all these videos you'd have seen videos of people using this brace (and the other types) and hitting their targets without issue.

Often mentioning the brace made it EASIER to hit them.

It's possible one particular model might not fit you well, specifically... but that's one reason there's multiple models offered after all.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
It sounds like you do NOT understand the point of what I was describing, and I noticed you do not rebut any single one of the aiming/geometry issues I describe for using it one handed in any of the standard pistol stances.
And I'm telling you I've actually used braces, unlike you, and they work fine.

If you want to ignore real life experience in favor of your guesses from internet videos knock yourself out.

But it's pretty weird given there's so many videos of OTHER people for whom it works fine too.



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
That's because you cannot, they are a SERIOUS problem, unless you are using this to turn a so-called AR pistol into a carbine. It's a two handed "pistol" that cannot, with this adapter, possibly be fired practically one-handed.
Except, it can, and since the only evidence you accept is internet videos you can find tons of them with people doing exactly the thing you insist is impossible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alcRhUF90dI

Oh look, someone shooting one handed with the brace and the gun stays quite stable and steady!

it's almost like the device actually works as intended!


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
So it's a two handed weapon that you hold to your cheek instead of your shoulder.
Well no, it's not.

it's a pistol you can shoot one OR two handed (there's nothing illegal about shooting a pistol with 2 hands of course- in fact, that's how MOST people shoot them).

You can ALSO use a cheek weld- as again LOTS of people have ALWAYS done with things like AR pistols.

This just improves the cheek weld.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Since you hold it to your cheek instead of your shoulder, it magically is a pistol and not carbine. vomit
Well, yes, [B]literally by definition[B/] US law defines a rifle as something designed to fire from the shoulder.

Pistols on the other hand can be fired with a cheek weld, and that's always been true.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/fire...tion-rifle

"The term "Rifle" means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder"


Which part is still confusing you?


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
OK - and there you show that you freely admit this is deliberate blurring of the definition between a rifle, SBR, and a pistol.
No- there you show you don't understand the actual definition of those things.

because shoulder or not is literally in the definition of rifle.

That's why it matters.

Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Just for jollies I googled "cheek weld" and "pistol". That is a term only used for the AR so-called pistols. So in an effort to get around the SBR laws you hold it mostly like a rifle, including a cheek weld (I'll grant you that's a clever use of words, except - I've never heard of cheek weld EXCEPT with rifles and shotguns) but let's magically not touch our shoulder.
Right, because again, that's literally how the law is written


I have to ask at this point if you have ever fired a gun at all?

Because the difference apart from legal is pretty huge too

Using your shoulder provides a solid recoil-absorbing stable base to fire a rifle from.

A cheek weld does not.... it's useful for sighting the weapon, but your face is not designed to absorb firearm recoil or stabilize shooting.

You seem to not understand the difference though... which anyone who had actually used any of the weapons he's trying to discuss should already know.



Go take a look at the Ruger Charger sometime.

It's also been around for years, and it's 100% legal.

And you can shoot it with 1 or 2 hands.

And cheek weld it.

And it's hardly the only non-AR pistol example out there.

Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
So let's get this straight. They market this device for handicapped shooters, when it cannot possibly work one-handed
Except, it can. Because that's literally what it was designed for according to YOUR OWN SOURCE.

Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
- which BTW you never address.
Yes, I did. Multiple times.

Including mentioning the device was invented by a veteran for his disabled friend

Did you miss that, or just ignore it because it proved you wrong?


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Also note the purported problem was due to lack of control by the handicapped shooter of an AR-15 "pistol", which is already playing fast and loose with the legal definition of pistol vs. rifle.
well no, it's not.

AR pistols have been around for decades and the legal definitions have been very clear to everyone... (except you apparently)

Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
So now it's for handicapped shooters using it for "two handed" shooting of an AR - pistol, which is carefully only cheek-welded but never touches the shoulder so it magically is no longer a pistol.
... what?

First- the one/two handed thing makes zero sense.

PISTOLS are shot with 2 hands most of the time too.

Second, if it's not designed to be fired from the shoulder then by definition it's not a rifle.

You seem to keep not understand the actual legal difference between a rifle and pistol.


Which is pretty unfortunate given your original post was attempting to offer legal advice that was...ill informed.



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Oh, and the sales vastly outstrip the target market

Not sure what that has to do with anything at all.

The AR platform to begin with was designed for military use, but sales far outstrip that now.

And it's hardly the only gun for which that's true.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
, and the ATF who are the legal authority on this have started cracking down, implying that there IS a problem
No, they haven't.

You can tell, because when I challenged you to cite anybody arrested for having a Sig brace on their gun... anywhere... ever... you had....nothing.

They are not "cracking down"

They simply issued an open letter clarifying their reading of existing law.

Which I explained in some detail and provided a link to in my original reply to you.

Did you read their letter?

Where it tells you exactly what I did? that this device is legal to own,mount on a pistol, and use as intended?


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
- after all these are the people who enforce these laws.

Yes they are.

And they explicitly say the device is LEGAL if used as intended.


So why you do keep claiming otherwise or implying there's some "risk" to doing that?


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
I guess you would support the existence of a "shotgun - pistol".
Of course I would.

Why wouldn't you?

Hell, S&W and Tarus have offered pistols that shoot shotgun rounds for YEARS.

And you can buy pistol-grip-only shotguns with shorter than 18" barrels, legally, all day long.

And have been able to for years.


Apparently it's yet another thing you simply didn't know existed?

Here's a link explaining WHY they are legal, and why the ATF has agreed they're legal pretty much forever.

http://shockwavetechnologies.com/...page_id=88



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
BTW besides my own handicap, the individual I purchased my Weatherby .300 magnum (I'm a southpaw and at the time this was one of three companies marketing non-custom left-handed bolts) had all of the fingers missing from one hand, and most from the other. Handling a long arm when handicapped is not the monstrous, onerous deal you seem to be portraying.

Well, I'm sure glad we have you here to speak for every handicapped person in the world! LMAO


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Except that making an inadvertent mistake means you are no longer "properly" using it, i.e. cheek weld vs. letting it touch your shoulder.

I'm again wondering if you actually have ever used a gun.

How do you "accidentally" shoulder a weapon and fire it 'by mistake'?

Any responsible gun owner doesn't even touch the trigger until the gun is properly held and aimed after all.

Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
We all know that nobody ever makes an inadvertent mistake.

Sure- people shoot themselves or others all the time because they don't follow basic rules of gun safety.


That doesn't mean we ought to ban guns because a few people are careless though does it?


Same thing here.

Used properly it's perfectly legal to own, mount on the pistol, and use it.


It's that simple.


Further- I again challenge you to cite ANYBODY ever arrested for the fearmongering situation you're so on about....

Anybody... anywhere.... ever....got any?

Didn't think so.


it's a nonsense concern with no basis in fact or reality.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Not true, and a poor misrepresentation of the facts. The minor shifting of the "non-butt plate" (FYI pistol with a butt plate - that already show an intention to blur the distinction between a long arm and a pistol) takes it from "legal" to "illegal".
Except, it doesn't. Since the ATF, which you admit is the authority here, explicitly says you're wrong, and that this is legal to own, mount, and use, if used as intended.

In other words it's not illegal unless you use it illegally.

Just like a gun. or car. or baseball bat. or literally anything else.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
There has been an very hard movement, among a small minority of 2nd amendment "enthusiasts" (or "extremists" depending on your bent) to push the limits of the various Federal Firearms laws. The simply existence of a "two-handed cheek welded pistol" shows problems
No, it doesn't.

Because those ahve been around for decades with no problem.


Remove the brace entirely, and it's still a pistol you can fire with 2 hands and a cheek weld.


You'd know that if you'd ever fired, or even held, an actual AR pistol, which clearly you have not.

But hey, since you ONLY believe internet videos- here's one proving this again!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8x_FyPX7U0

AR pistol. No brace of any kind.

Fired with 2 hands. And a cheek weld.

As they have been for years and years with no legal issues whatsoever.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
(not my opinion, the ATF involvement shows the people tasked with the enforcement of those laws were having problems, too)

No, it does not.

someone ASKED the ATF for a ruling.

they gave one.

then later someone else asked for one.

They gave one that contradicted the first one (the ATF often does this, because different people there answer different letters)

This caused a lot of confusion among gun owners and manufacturers.


So they then issued an "open" letter to clarify the "official" answer.

they didn't 'crack down' on anything.

They just issued a letter restating the law and their reading of it.

That's ALL they did.

And NOTHING in it says ANYTHING against owning, mounting, or using this device.

or against firing a pistol with 2 hands.

or against a cheek weld on a pistol.

all of which remain legal as they always have.

Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
, as were the legal fictions that were attempts to get around the laws on background checks and special licensing for automatic weapons and sound suppressors.

... what?

I almost think you're showing a total ignorance of how NFA interacted with firearms trusts... (which ALSO remain legal by the way, and always required a background check and licensing)....

but that's probably a whole other thread to correct your misinformation on that topic LMAO


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
Again, rebut that the ATF got involved if you want to argue whether this is or is not pushing the limits of the appropriate legal terms.
Already covered.

They said one thing, then said the other, then clarified which was correct.

There was no "crackdown" of any kind, nobody has ever been arrested or even charged for just owning mounting or properly using this product.

You're scaremongering out of a complete lack of understanding of the law.



Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
I am all for a discussion about these laws
Then I strongly suggest you actually read them... come back when you understand why "shouldering" specifically is an important thing for example.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
BTW I didn't realize how differently we were looking at things until you used the term "cheek weld" with pistol, which made me realize your intentions.
My intention was to present practical facts and correct legal definiitons.


Quote from Mr. Harley View Post :
All the geometry issues go away if you never use it one handed, which you conveniently ignore since to your two-handed cheek-welded pistol is "legal".

.... what?


really your obsession with one hand baffles me.

REGULAR pistols are fired two handed all the time.

The standard weaver stance that's been around since the 1950s uses 2 hands on a pistol.

So why are you so mystified that anybody uses 2 hands on a pistol?


that's apart from all the real world (and even on video!) examples of people successfully finding IMPROVEMENT in even 1 handed shooting with this brace.

Something you keep insisting is geometrically impossible despite being on film as happening.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 1 of 1
1
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2016. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard