Fishin Texas Aggie 05 said:
SB Tactical, along with the law offices of Mark Barnes & Associates
CactusThomas said:
Hardest working man in gun rights advocacy.
I get bothered when people misuse the word "acronym".texags08 said:
Kudos to you '05 for using the correct acronym. not sure why it bothers me so much when people insist on using BATFE and scolding others for using ATF.
The freaking ATF uses ATF as their acronym.
/rant
Obligatory:
I disagree with this interpretation. The clarification letter clearly states that if the shooter/possessor takes affirmative steps to configure the device (Stabilizing Brace) for use as a shoulder stock - for example, permanently affixing to the end of the buffer tube, removing the arm strap, or otherwise would undermine it's ability to be used as a brace - and then in fact shoots from the shoulder using the reconfigured device (stabilizing brace), that person has objectively "redesigned" the firearm (SBR). In your example, the shooter/possessor did not reconfigure the brace and therefore did not redesign the firearm.gumby579 said:
So one interpretation (via Reddit) is that the statement says it's okay to shoulder but if you put a brace on with the INTENT of shouldering then it makes it an actual SBR and would need the stamp and blah blah. So basically, build a pistol and "accidentally" shouldering is okay.
Letter says a "firearm". Firearm is a specific legal term that includes rifles and shotguns. An SBS has a barrel <18".nimrodag99 said:
I thought rifles need a 16" barrel. The letter says 18"
cpsencik04 said:
Do we think this ruling will apply to the blade as well as the Sig brace? I'm just starting the acquisition process for a pistol build and trying to decide which to get. I prefer the look of the blade but wanted yalls opinion which yall like more and which helps yall stabilize best.