Separate names with a comma.
Welcome to Oklahoma Shooters Association! Join today, registration is easy!
Discussion in 'NFA & Class III Discussion' started by CAR-AR-M16, Nov 23, 2014.
Can you imagine what it would be like if people were as terrified of the IRS as they are of the ATF?
I'm legal don't own one, never understood how they came the conclusion that it wasn't an SBR in the first place. Sure sucks for anybody who has one if it changes.
The ruling for the shotgun was accurate because there is no such thing as a "pistol" shotgun. The sig brace is meant to be used on a pistol, which there is no classification for shotguns. Even shotguns without stocks have to have 18.5" barrels or be classified as SBS or AOW's. Is the ruling something we should pay attention to? Yes. With that said... there's tons of blogs, youtube personalities and industry articles that seem more interested in fear mongering than actually reporting the facts and "why" the ATF ruled the way they did.
Carry on with the the sig braces on AR pistols.
the whole sbr rule is dumb to begin with.
The entire NFA is dumb in my opinion.
And suppressors as well. There are countries more regulated firearms wise than us with no regulation of suppressors.
I originally saw this on Optics Planets FB page, with a convenient link to the Sig brace sale page. Nothing like a little fear to drive sales.
I really was hoping that a market flooded with arm brace pistols would encourage rethinking of SBR NFA stuff to be as ridiculous as it actually is. I remain cautiously optimistic.