Challenging the BATFE to stop eating crayons

images_Ares-Gear

Challenging the Sig Brace decision 2

Our attorney says we should pass this along ASAP. Who are we to question our lawyer when we’re in Vegas (especially if he is also in Vegas, and he has all the hookups for the forthcoming AVN awards)? Anyway, Alex Bosco (inventor of the Sig Brace), Sig Sauer, and a number of other people are as you can imagine quite stirred up about the recent ruling by the BATFE. Here’s some of what they have to say, courtesy of SB Tactical  and Sig Sauer. Mad Duo

SB Tactical:

SAINT PETERSBURG, FL – issues the following statement for attribution to Alex Bosco, Founder, CEO and Inventor of the SB Tactical Stabilizing Brace:

“The Stabilizing Brace was conceptualized to assist a disabled war veteran in shooting the AR pistol the way that it was intended; safely and accurately. The finalized design is for people with limited mobility due to a handicap or the lack of strength to fire AR pistols in compliance with the Gun Control Act.

Thousands of individuals have been physically empowered by the Stabilizing Brace to better control and safely handle shooting a pistol, including law enforcement officers, border patrol agents and veterans.

The ATF has been inconsistent in their approach to this accessory. As the Inventor of the Stabilizing Brace, the product has never been ‘designed or redesigned, made or remade, or intended to be fired from the shoulder.’ The latest opinion issued prohibits people from freely using a legal product, restricting how shooters position the pistol, and is contrary to the intent and statutory language enacted by the U.S. Congress.

SB Tactical continues to consult with industry leaders and other critical stakeholders on next steps in this process.”Challenging the Sig Brace Ruling

subscribe to the newsletter

From Sig Sauer:

“As reaffirmed in an Open Letter by ATF’s Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division dated January 16, 2015, the Pistol Stabilizing Brace (SB15 and SBX) is legal to own, legal to purchase, and legal to install on a pistol. SIG SAUER® believes that the PSB improves the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped pistols, and offers the product both as an accessory and pre-installed on a number of pistols.

The Open Letter goes further to rescind a previous private letter regarding the ‘intent’ of the user of the pistol stabilizing brace. In the letter of January 16, 2015, ATF opines that a person’s actual use of the product as a shoulder stock can change the legal classification of the product. However, the Open Letter explicitly states: “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.

We question ATF’s reversal in position that the classification of the brace may be altered by its use. We are reviewing the legal precedents and justification for this position, and will address our concerns with ATF in the near future.

We will vigorously defend the classification of all of our products and our consumers’ right to use them in accordance with the law. If we find that the open letter opinion is outside the scope of the law, we will seek further review.”

We still think a class action lawsuit would be awesome!

Comms Plan

Primary: Subscribe to our newsletter here or get the RSS feed.

Alternate: Join us on Facebook here or check us out on Instagram here.

Contingency: Exercise your inner perv with us on Tumblr here, follow us on Twitter here or connect on Google + here.

Emergency: Activate firefly, deploy green (or brown) star cluster, get your wank sock out of your ruck and stand by ’til we come get you.

Mad Duo, Breach-Bang & CLEAR!

images_mad_duo_Over_Duo

 

14 thoughts on “Challenging the BATFE to stop eating crayons

  • Pingback:News Links for Friday 01-30-2015 | Xcuz Me

  • January 26, 2015 at 7:30 pm
    Permalink

    um…hate to break it to you, but I’ve been to a few of the events that SB Tactical does in Florida. The last even I went to must have had at least 200 wounded vets using it precisely as it was designed. So what if people are using it incorrectly? There is no question that it works as advertised and actually makes the Ar pistol easier to shoot with one hand. And in fact those that truly have a disability are those most angered. They want to be able to shoot as they please as much as any other gun owner. The real question is, why aren’t you angered at the most recent ruling? The precedent is scary, and if the ATF can suddenly decide to change their mind one one thing, what to say that tomorrow they don’t change it for something you hold most dear.

  • January 26, 2015 at 6:48 pm
    Permalink

    Everyone was fine until shooters stopped eating their crayons and started to use them to pester the BATF over and over again.

    “THIS IS WHY YOU CAN’T HAVE NICE THINGS!”

  • January 26, 2015 at 12:18 pm
    Permalink

    This issue will lead to the ATF and legislation realizing and having to repeal the above mentioned underlying cause of the problem; the federal ban on sbr and sbs that made illogical laws that infringe on the peoples 2nd amendment rights while ineffectively curbing felony crimes. The SB15 is not the problem.

  • January 23, 2015 at 10:33 am
    Permalink

    sad to say, but we all know that the brace is not used as designed. we can go over semantics all day long. at the end of it, it was a very nice ploy to try and skirt SBR laws, because they are the only ones pissed off. if you had a true disability that needed the brace, you wouldn’t be trying to shoulder your pistol with it.

    • January 26, 2015 at 10:29 am
      Permalink

      So, you’re good with the whole “redesign” explaination from the ATF? After all, it’s just semantics, right? Or maybe it’s the whole, “request permission” before traveling with, or allowing another access to your personal property that you like?

      Maybe you could pull your head from your ass and realize that you should be equally pissed-off regardless of owning the brace because eventually, they’ll get to making (or “redesigning”) a law that affects your coveted items. Seems to remind me of a Niemöller quote…

    • January 26, 2015 at 3:09 pm
      Permalink

      It is worth noting that, even if used as a brace, if used in the manner depicted in the pictures above, the user is still in violation. Technically, from the BATFE perspective, handguns are to be used with only one (1) hand. Anyone using either a classic Weaver or some version of the isosceles stance is, in fact, in violation. I didn’t believe it until I was shown the regulations, but it is true. When originally submitted for classification, the designer explicitly states that the device is designed for “… firing with one hand.” I belive that this was to remain consistent with 18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(29) and 27 CFR § 478.11, which states:

      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);

      -and a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).

      Use of only one hand is clearly mentioned, twice.

      I wonder how long it will be before using a two hand grip puts you in violation, and subject to the stamp tax because your use of a Glock 17 with tow hands reclassifies it to AOW status.

  • January 23, 2015 at 8:44 am
    Permalink

    We shouldn’t be mucking around with this issue in the first place. We need to work on resending the ban/restrictions of SBRs and SBS and this will no longer be a problem. Why expend recourses fighting this instead of using them to attack the underlying issue.

    • January 23, 2015 at 8:45 am
      Permalink

      *resources

  • January 22, 2015 at 7:52 pm
    Permalink

    If putting it on your shoulder is a problem ,Then wouldn’t using two hands on a pistol be a problem?

  • January 22, 2015 at 5:41 pm
    Permalink

    Hi, i just bought a sb-x brace. i have grip problems, all the cartlidge is gone from both thumbs,near wrist! currently-Im affraid to even install this brace,as i might be accused of building a illegal sbr gun, and my magpul angled foregrip is probably coming off, because of fear they will ban it and i wont know. wondering about the cane tip on my other pistol, does it become a illegal sbr with a stock now too? or is it just the act of enjoying firarms they are trying to ban, with out a congressional vote?

    • January 23, 2015 at 8:10 am
      Permalink

      The letter makes it clear that using the brace as designed it is perfectly legal. You will be fine.

  • January 22, 2015 at 4:54 pm
    Permalink

    Eating crayons might be putting it a little nice. They’re the epitome of a government agency and government employees. About as effective as a football bat and twice as useful.

  • January 22, 2015 at 2:25 pm
    Permalink

    file the lawsuit. u now have the majority on your side in all of congress. wait. that’s the guberment. eject! eject!

Comments are closed.