NFA regs are stupid
Yeah, pretty much:
15 Responses to “NFA regs are stupid”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
July 16th, 2014 at 9:54 pm
ATF = POS
Do the math.
July 16th, 2014 at 11:08 pm
It’s the inherent result of trying to apply the rigid law to flexible mechanical design. If people would ever realize you can’t rigidly define mechanical designs via law, we’d be rid of this nonsense…
July 17th, 2014 at 12:14 am
Hey, everybody! Let’s tease the ATF about how dorky this is and see if we can get them to reverse the decision!
July 17th, 2014 at 6:41 am
That was my first reaction as well. Let’s not do anything to make them reevaluate the sb15 just yet, please.
BTW, If that AR barrel is longer than 12″ it’s not a pistol in Tennessee.
July 17th, 2014 at 8:21 am
We don’t have to Tease the ATF. When they see it is popular they will reverse their decision by default.
July 17th, 2014 at 9:02 am
I just wish that NY had the same demented opinion on that Glock-enstein being a rifle. It’d save me the hassle of the NYS permit process.
July 17th, 2014 at 9:22 am
Ahh, yes, because laying low is always a the way to avoid having your wife shot or your home burned down by the ATF.
July 17th, 2014 at 10:44 am
What does that even mean?
July 17th, 2014 at 12:54 pm
I think Ryan is referring to Matt Braken’s Novel as that is how it starts.
July 17th, 2014 at 1:46 pm
Well, no, Ryan’s references are to Ruby Ridge and Waco.
July 17th, 2014 at 2:28 pm
That first one looks like a rifle to me … and probably the ATF, once someone notices how they’re being used.
All it’ll take is pictures of someone firing it from the shoulder and ATF noticing that it works just fine.
(e.g. This guy ruined it for you by showing exactly that it’s a shoulder stock and who does SIG think it’s fooling anyway?)
The moment anyone questions it, that “wink wink it’s a forearm brace” stock will be noticed to be “intended to be fired from the shoulder”, thus making it legally a rifle.
This is not really the ATF’s fault. This is the NFA’s fault, and thus Congress’s fault.
Imagine that.
July 17th, 2014 at 2:29 pm
(http://www.armslist.com/posts/2471049/knoxville-tennessee-gun-parts-for-sale-trade–sig-sb-15-in-stock-psb-ar-blk-ar15-pistol-stabilizing-brace-for-sale, since the link might be broken?)
July 18th, 2014 at 4:47 pm
Sigivald —
ATF was asked SPECIFICALLY if it would be legal to use the arm brace in that fashion, against the shoulder, as a stock. They answered, “Yes, that’s legal — it is DESIGNED as an arm brace, and the fact that someone is using it ‘incorrectly’ doesn’t change the legal classification.”
However, DO NOT remove the velcro straps — that makes it NOT an arm brace, and into a stock.
Again, ATF has made some (IMNSHO) boneheaded determinations in the past, but they are dead on target here (in both cases), by the strict letter of the law. Which is, after all, how they SHOULD be making determinations, isn’t it?
July 19th, 2014 at 1:57 pm
Now that’s funny right there! Of course, the interpretation of the law depends on which agent you happen to speak with at the ATF. I have heard so many variances.
http://www.HeroesTactical.com
July 21st, 2014 at 12:55 pm
Heroes — there’s a difference between you or me asking J. Random Agent, and major players in the industry getting formal written determinations.