ATF change of postion on SIG brace

[gopurdue02]

Form 1 - 5320.1 Manufacture Archives: NFA Gun Trust Lawyer Blog

 

[wsenefeld]

This should be a Sticky for a while. Dozens of members here own a Sig brace and I'd hate to see ATF agents patrolling the forums looking to see who's posting recent pictures of a shouldered Sig brace to use as evidence. Thankful I never bought one and just went the SBR route.

 

[T-DOGG]

Tagged for interest

 

[BiscuitNaBasket]

Thought this would happen sooner or later. That's a shame.

 

[EvilKidsMeal]

I read through the 15+ page on Arfcom regarding this with nothing to show for it.

This really puts a damper on my build plans. I was going to build a pistol and use the Thordsen Customs buffer tube set up, but now i fear it would be very easy for the ATF to come to a similar determination on that, or even just a plain buffer tube. Regardless of intent or use, I think pistols are extremely gray now, and don't think I want to chance it.

Thinking i may go SPRish/DMRish for this build, unless there is a clear determination. Guess I'll accumulate non-type specific upper parts and see what comes of this.

 

[Trigger Time]

Yawn

 

[Trigger Time]

If you intend to build a pistol and after doing so you then shoulder fire the pistol at the range it's NOT illegal. If you intend to build a rifle and use the sig brace on your build with the full intention of shoulder firing the gun then you've built an sbr and it's subject to registration. Just make sure your stated intent for any NEW builds is clearly to build a pistol. This is just political bs because the atf got the wiener slammed In the door.
hiws the other lawsuit with sig going? Sig still taking the atf to task?

 

[calcot7]

I guess they decided they were missing out on all that tax stamp money?

 

[Destro]

If you intend to build a pistol and after doing so you then shoulder fire the pistol at the range it's NOT illegal. If you intend to build a rifle and use the sig brace on your build with the full intention of shoulder firing the gun then you've built an sbr and it's subject to registration. Just make sure your stated intent for any NEW builds is clearly to build a pistol. This is just political bs because the atf got the wiener slammed In the door.
hiws the other lawsuit with sig going? Sig still taking the atf to task?

This...the guy writing that letter is a moron. Of course you can't put a Sig brace on a rifle with the the explecit intention of circumventing the NFA

 

[T-DOGG]

This is an example of the "grey area" in the firearm industry that frustrates the crap out of me, this and various other gun laws varying from state to state. Why the hell can't they just make the rules cut and dry, instead of trying to confuse everyone? Oh wait, this is the Government we're talking about here, I forgot.

 

[gopurdue02]

I hate to say it this way, but trust paperwork was 250 bucks and the tax stamp is 200. What is the big deal about going that route vs rolling the dice with a "brace" and getting thrown into jail? With the new e-file system took 30 days to process my last request

 

[EvilKidsMeal]

I hate to say it this way, but trust paperwork was 250 bucks and the tax stamp is 200. What is the big deal about going that route vs rolling the dice with a "brace" and getting thrown into jail? With the new e-file system took 30 days to process my last request

That's all well and good, but that makes the build cost $450 more just for some paper. Not everyone wants to do that. On top of that SBR's require more paperwork when transporting out of state (which I am sure isn't difficult, but that's not the point), where as a pistol falls under carry laws.

 

[jd4320t]

Who didn't see this coming?

 

[M67]

Hopefully Sig is still strong with lawsuit power

 

[T-DOGG]

I hate to say it this way, but trust paperwork was 250 bucks and the tax stamp is 200. What is the big deal about going that vs rolling the dice with a "brace" and getting thrown in jaIL and my family evicted from the house because no money coming in? Just got an sbr back and took exactly 30 days to get

Because the brace costs $125 and Sig Sauer includes a letter from the BATFE in the package stating that shoulder firing with the brace does not change the way the firearm is classified and does not make it an NFA regulated rifle. I assume most people don't want to hassle with the tax stamp if they can get similar results without it and save money also. Just my

 

[Destro]

come on people....

If your using the Sig brace to build an AR pistol and decide to shoulder it, you are good to go.

If you are using the Sig brace to circumvent the NFA and are using the Sig brace to build a SBR, then it's a no go

Seems simple, don't build a SBR with a Sig brace and you are GTG

 

[calcot7]

come on people....

If your using the Sig brace to build an AR pistol and decide to shoulder it, you are good to go.

If you are using the Sig brace to circumvent the NFA and are using the Sig brace to build a SBR, then it's a no go

Seems simple, don't build a SBR with a Sig brace and you are GTG

It sounds like if you use the Sig brace on a pistol and decide to shoulder it you better not do it in public or anywhere you might encounter a drone.

 

[calcot7]

Who didn't see this coming?

The same people that don't see the semi-auto ban ever happening I guess.

 

[Hkindiana]

The way i see it, A 2x4 is just a piece of lumber, UNTIL you tape it to a Colt .45 1911. THEN when you shoulder fire the weapon, it IS a SBR (the pistol, not the 2x4). The 2x4 was not MANUFACTURED as a stock, however USING it as one would change the classification of YOUR weapon from pistol to short barreled rifle. The 2x4 in an of itself would not be illegal, just how it was USED, would make YOUR pistol an unregistered SBR. If I put a SIG brace on a pistol, I sure as heck would take LOTS of photos of it being used properly as a one handed brace, and NO pictures of it being used as a shoulder stock.

 

[cop car]

The ATF gives different people different answers, sometimes they give the same people different answers, depending on when they ask, there is 0 consistency in this joke of an organization. I swear they do this stuff just so they can have jobs. Rather than them constantly looking like jackasses, and incompetent as sholes, someone just needs to come out and say "in the light of modern firearms technology, and changes in the difficulty of defining a firearm as a pistol or a rifle, the sbr portion of this law written almost 100 years ago is no longer going to be enforced"