JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
17,146
Reactions
37,048
Seriously how is there still laws against SBRs anymore. ATF approves this and it attaches to a proprietary CARBINE, yes carbine, buffer tube.

Looks adjustable too.

Add this to the list of growing adjustable pistol braces, sure makes me wonder why the hell we still have SBR laws.

Introducing Blade 2.0 | Shockwave Technologies

IMG_0942.jpg
 
I wounder how diligently companies like KAK and SB tactical advocate for the removal of SBR restrictions... Im sure they would never let the idea of losing a lucrative niche in a booming market stop them from fighting the good fight.:s0153:
 
I wounder how diligently companies like KAK and SB tactical advocate for the removal of SBR restrictions... Im sure they would never let the idea of losing a lucrative niche in a booming market stop them from fighting the good fight.:s0153:

I prefer their braces for the occasional accidental shouldering of a light compact pistol. :D
 
I for one hope they sell a poop load of these, and other manufacturers did the same, inundate the market with these. Sell sell sell tons of braced pistols, therefore it becomes extremely hard to actually regulate.

Just like how no one shouldered those pistol braces during the time they weren't supposed to be shouldered.
 
Are you insinuating the most intuitive way to use this this KAK Shockwave is not to put up to ones shoulder? Once on ones shoulder, how does this differ from a "stock", fundamentally?
Insinuating? No , just stating facts. An SBR is a short barreled rifle with a stock. A pistol brace is not a stock , hence you don't need a Form 1. Why is this confusing.
 
Insinuating? No , just stating facts. An SBR is a short barreled rifle with a stock. A pistol brace is not a stock , hence you don't need a Form 1. Why is this confusing.

If you gave this "pistol" with a "pistol brace" to someone and had them shoot it, not only would they refer to it as a rifle or a long gun the entire time but they would naturally put it to ones shoulder.

It's semantics and frankly semantics have no room in guns or gun legislation.

I can appreciate you wanting to keep referring to it as a pistol brace for legality sake, because the last thing we want is to not to be able to do this, but let's not pretend its skirting the line and it mimics all the functions of a rifle with a stock.
 
If you gave this "pistol" with a "pistol brace" to someone and had them shoot it, not only would they refer to it as a rifle or a long gun the entire time but they would naturally put it to ones shoulder.

It's semantics and frankly semantics have no room in guns or gun legislation.

I can appreciate you wanting to keep referring to it as a pistol brace for legality sake, because the last thing we want is to not to be able to do this, but let's not pretend its skirting the line and it mimics all the functions of a rifle with a stock.
Next your'e gonna say that an AR is an assault rifle right?
 
You are attempting to redefine something based on looks. That is a favorite move of the Anti. Why not just shoot more. Save the analysis of intended use for the alphabet agencies.

You clearly misunderstood me. I don't think the alphabet agencies should be classifying weapons and these items literally prove how ludicrous the system is. I'm not saying what I believe, I stated how I think an average person would pick this up and perceive/use it.

I plan on building a few "pistol" AR lowers to take advantage of this mockery.
 
Occasionally there will be a nail sticking out that needs pounded in. Maybe you left your hammer in your other pants, and all you can find is a crescent wrench. It's not designed to pound nails, but it will work in a pinch. It's your tool... pound away.
 
If you gave this "pistol" with a "pistol brace" to someone and had them shoot it, not only would they refer to it as a rifle or a long gun the entire time but they would naturally put it to ones shoulder.

It's semantics and frankly semantics have no room in guns or gun legislation.

I can appreciate you wanting to keep referring to it as a pistol brace for legality sake, because the last thing we want is to not to be able to do this, but let's not pretend its skirting the line and it mimics all the functions of a rifle with a stock.

It's not pretending.... Semantics (as you say) in this day and age count very much (just look how those "semantics" work in our founding documents). Just because someone refers to a "clip" and you know they mean a magazine, they are in fact wrong.

Stock versus a brace or cheek comforter; whatever.....semantics do matter....who cares? a lot of people..........BUT .....it is NOT a stock, just a brace to help others shoot comfortably and safely.
 

Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors March Gun Show
Portland, OR
Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top