National ATF coming for pistol braces

[wired]

Although for some reason Washington State seems to think binary triggers are bad.

Not a binary

 

[The Heretic]

I do think a lot of people got bump stocks so they could increase the rate of fire for some fun. Same thing with some triggers and trigger accessories.



And I believe a lot of the braces sold are not because the buyer is disabled, but because they want to be able to shoulder the brace. That is not the stated purpose of the inventor/seller, but it is the usage.

I have no problem with that intention or usage. If it gets around the NFA then more power to the buyers and users. The NFA sucks and is unconstitutional, as are almost all gun control laws.

 

[sobo]

Although for some reason Washington State seems to think binary triggers are bad.

Whuh? WA banned binary triggers?

 

[FourTeeFive]

Whuh? WA banned binary triggers?

Snuck into the new definition of "machine gun" during the last redo of gun laws by the idiots In Oly:

RCW 9.41.010: Definitions.

See section 19

Nobody will ship binary triggers to WA.

Some discussion here too:

Are Binary Triggers Legal In Washington?

Like the title says. I was looking at ShootingIlustrated and saw an ad by Franklin Armory and they have them for CZ Scorpion as well asARs and others. So...Legal or not?

www.northwestfirearms.com

 

[The Heretic]

 

[The Heretic]

 

[Member 3687]

RANT

What bothers me is they say there is 100 million folks out there that own guns out of the 350 million folks in the US.

Out of that they say 75 million own more than one that totals up to the 400 million guns in civilian uses.

Then I see 3% stickers everywhere on rigs like they are bad asses. Three percent of 100 million would add up to 3 million folks of the 100-million-gun owners that say they are hard core gun owners.

Yet out of all the gun owners we cannot even hit 300,000 signatures on the Frame Receiver AFT changes and currently we can not even get 200,000 on the Arm Brace rule changes no wonder we cannot get ahead if we are not even willing to send a canned message provided by many organizations out there. I mean folks do not even need to come up with their own thoughts just fill in some blanks and hit send.

We deserve to lose all are rights if we can not even spend 5 minutes to send a canned message.

You may not like Arm Braces or agree with building your own guns but just doing nothing to me is telling them to please regulate me to death and take my rights away.

This is SAD, very SAD

If you sent a comment thank you, if not then why even own guns.

RANT OVER

 

[CamoDeafie]

RANT

What bothers me is they say there is 100 million folks out there that own guns out of the 350 million folks in the US.

Out of that they say 75 million own more than one that totals up to the 400 million guns in civilian uses.

Then I see 3% stickers everywhere on rigs like they are bad asses. Three percent of 100 million would add up to 3 million folks of the 100-million-gun owners that say they are hard core gun owners.

Yet out of all the gun owners we cannot even hit 300,000 signatures on the Frame Receiver AFT changes and currently we can not even get 200,000 on the Arm Brace rule changes no wonder we cannot get ahead if we are not even willing to send a canned message provided by many organizations out there. I mean folks do not even need to come up with their own thoughts just fill in some blanks and hit send.

We deserve to lose all are rights if we can not even spend 5 minutes to send a canned message.

You may not like Arm Braces or agree with building your own guns but just doing nothing to me is telling them to please regulate me to death and take my rights away.

This is SAD, very SAD

If you sent a comment thank you, if not then why even own guns.

RANT OVER

Never underestimate the sheer strength of abject apathy and laziness. "I got mine, why should I care?"

 

[Diamondback]

And with the NRA trying to save Wayne's grift rather than be an early and loud leader at a time when visibly wading into a fight might make critics back off...

 

[arakboss]

Today is the last day to get your pistol brace comments in. Tell them to quit picking on our most vulnerable citizens.

Regulations.gov

www.regulations.gov

 

[gmerkt]

Not too long ago, I was in a gun shop and the counter clerk there was talking up the CAA Micro Roni pistol stock. You take your Glock, M&P or whatever (that fits what they make) and insert it into the Micro stock. The clerk said, "Yeah, you can shoot your Glock accurately out to 200 yards with this." Well, maybe. BUT: If I'm gonna shoot out to 200 yards, I'm gonna want a real rifle in the first place. This is what I don't get about the entire wrist brace thing, EXCEPT maybe for disabled veterans who were the initial intended beneficiaries of this technology in the first place. If that wasn't just a gag to get a foot in the door.

Same comment as to AR's with wrist braces and SBR's. I fail to see the practical point of them. Accordingly, all the commotion about their legality and the niggling fine points of definition seem like a lot of unnecessary noise and static.

 

[arakboss]

Not too long ago, I was in a gun shop and the counter clerk there was talking up the CAA Micro Roni pistol stock. You take your Glock, M&P or whatever (that fits what they make) and insert it into the Micro stock. The clerk said, "Yeah, you can shoot your Glock accurately out to 200 yards with this." Well, maybe. BUT: If I'm gonna shoot out to 200 yards, I'm gonna want a real rifle in the first place. This is what I don't get about the entire wrist brace thing, EXCEPT maybe for disabled veterans who were the initial intended beneficiaries of this technology in the first place. If that wasn't just a gag to get a foot in the door.

Same comment as to AR's with wrist braces and SBR's. I fail to see the practical point of them. Accordingly, all the commotion about their legality and the niggling fine points of definition seem like a lot of unnecessary noise and static.

I am confident an AR pistol will shoot accurately at 200yds with a good brace and technique. Infringment is not noise and static to me.

 

[CamoDeafie]

BUT: If I'm gonna shoot out to 200 yards, I'm gonna want a real rifle in the first place. This is what I don't get about the entire wrist brace thing, EXCEPT maybe for disabled veterans who were the initial intended beneficiaries of this technology in the first place. If that wasn't just a gag to get a foot in the door.

Same comment as to AR's with wrist braces and SBR's. I fail to see the practical point of them. Accordingly, all the commotion about their legality and the niggling fine points of definition seem like a lot of unnecessary noise and static.

Couple things.
1. Braces on large "pistols" that fire intermediate-rifle cartridges like the 5.56 NATO and their derivatives and the 7.62x39 and their derivatives, and the wildcats available.... they make sense especially with shorter barreled uppers for stability.. for pistol caliber cartridges though? Only way to really make them useful are for the full auto versions in other countries, which make them that much more stable (Glock 18... Steyr TMP)

2. There are situations where a carbine with a shorter than 16" barrel makes a lot more sense... and still are more affordable than a bullpup. Urban/home defense, vehicle borne, concealed in backpacks and as "pistols", they usually are allowed with CHLs unlike regular length ARs which in practicality cannot be openly carried loaded in Portland


From my research on the ballistics and range of the 6.5 Grendel out of a 12" barrel from the Grendel Forums, as well as that of the Rem 6.8 SPC2 cartridge... it seems they both retain a lot more energy, less drop and more velocity out to 400 yards or more compared to a short barreled 5.56 or 7.62x39 or a supersonic .300 BLK... one user has reported being able to hit a 12" steel target at 600 yards with a 12" barreled 6.5 Grendel..

Now, thats some impressive ballistics... of course, weight and smaller diameter makes up for it.. but compared to a regular ol 7.62x39, the Grendel and the 6.8 SPC both seem to retain more velocity and energy at longer ranges than the Russian caliber.


Back on topic. I won't be surprised at all if Congress is able to pass new bills with the intent to "add" further definitions and possibly more categories to the NFA1934 and GCA1968 laws to cover pretty much everything the AWB tried to cover.

 

[The Heretic]

Not too long ago, I was in a gun shop and the counter clerk there was talking up the CAA Micro Roni pistol stock. You take your Glock, M&P or whatever (that fits what they make) and insert it into the Micro stock. The clerk said, "Yeah, you can shoot your Glock accurately out to 200 yards with this." Well, maybe. BUT: If I'm gonna shoot out to 200 yards, I'm gonna want a real rifle in the first place. This is what I don't get about the entire wrist brace thing, EXCEPT maybe for disabled veterans who were the initial intended beneficiaries of this technology in the first place. If that wasn't just a gag to get a foot in the door.

Same comment as to AR's with wrist braces and SBR's. I fail to see the practical point of them. Accordingly, all the commotion about their legality and the niggling fine points of definition seem like a lot of unnecessary noise and static.

Arm braces may or may not be used as a way thru "loophole" in the law, just as the Shockwave/Tac-14/et. al. are. But they are allow by the law, as are binary triggers/etc., and as were bumpstocks.

When one looks at the intent of the Second Amendment, it was to provide a balance of power between the government and the governed, the Founders not liking the idea of a "Standing Army" and the power that gave the government.

Here we are, 230 years after the Second Amendment was added to the US Constitution and the federal government has been intentionally, gradually and steadily, eroding the protection of the Second Amendment for almost 90 years. The federal government and states motivation is to disarm us so that they can gradually and steadily increase their powerbase.

I for one do not have a problem with arm braces, binary triggers, bumpstocks, "firearms" (e.g., Shockwave) or any other workaround we use to slow down that erosion. The laws that are in place - the NFA, the GCA, etc., are all unconstitutional.

So I don't care whether the workarounds are "practical" or not, or whether able-bodied gun owners use them in a way that upsets the Powers That Be. Boo hoo. Too bad so sad. This is not about crime or safety or children - it is about disarmament of the populace. The more the PTB is upset, the better I like it.

 

[MasterChief]

+1 on the Grendel in pistol.

 

[villagelightsm]

I have never seen anyone use a pistol brace as brace, everyone l see using them shoulders it like a stock. Just sayin.

They don't do a good job of either function. ATF is just looking for a way to justify their existence and their spending.

 

[gmerkt]

Infringment is not noise and static to me.

There was nothing to be infringed upon until these things came out of the woodwork as the latest fad.

I'm surprised some people here are willing to go for the SBR, pay the $200 tax, get their name on a list. Surprised because I also read people on NWFA discussing not wanting to be on government lists.

Urban/home defense, vehicle borne, concealed in backpacks

Unless you have very narrow corridors in your home (like maybe a mobile home, perhaps) a 16 in. bbl. and collapsible stock AR is already pretty handy.

In Wash., we aren't allowed to carry loaded rifles in vehicles. I wonder if the SBR is a rifle for that purpose? Also in Wash., our carry permits say, "Concealed Pistol Permit." I wonder how the SBR stacks up on that, anyone in Wash. know?

 

[sobo]

In Wash., we aren't allowed to carry loaded rifles in vehicles. I wonder if the SBR is a rifle for that purpose?

Yes.

Also in Wash., our carry permits say, "Concealed Pistol Permit." I wonder how the SBR stacks up on that, anyone in Wash. know?

An SBR is, by definition, a rifle, and would be illegal to carry loaded in your vehicle, even with a CHP. However, the law (currently) allows an AR or AK-pattern rifle that does not have a telescoping stock to be carried in your vehicle loaded as it is (still) classified as a pistol. Essentially, with a valid CHP, you could carry this AR/AK pistol just as you would a regular handgun (for now).

There's a ton of threads on this board discussing this very subject.

 

[CamoDeafie]

There was nothing to be infringed upon until these things came out of the woodwork as the latest fad.

I'm surprised some people here are willing to go for the SBR, pay the $200 tax, get their name on a list. Surprised because I also read people on NWFA discussing not wanting to be on government lists.


Unless you have very narrow corridors in your home (like maybe a mobile home, perhaps) a 16 in. bbl. and collapsible stock AR is already pretty handy.

In Wash., we aren't allowed to carry loaded rifles in vehicles. I wonder if the SBR is a rifle for that purpose? Also in Wash., our carry permits say, "Concealed Pistol Permit." I wonder how the SBR stacks up on that, anyone in Wash. know?

All the the more reason to support the braced or cheek rest AR pistol system. As pistols, they can absolutely be legally loaded and carried in vehicles.

Blade braced 12" AR pistol under 16" M4gery. Sure, "not that much different" but.... its 1.lighter than the 16" version, mostly from less barrel, lighter upper receiver, lighter blade. 2. It feels handier for me than the 16" which feels a bit cumbersome relatively.
3. Its easier to pack in a standard sized backpack than the 16" version.

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

10.5-12.5 balances pretty good compared to a 16"