There are 1000’s of guys in jail right now for possession of a little weed so that train of thought probably won’t pan out, not to mention all the new felons up in CT with their “high capacity mags” . “They” don’t give a fuck and that’s apparent. Rational logic doesn’t fit the narrative and until King barry hits the bricks, I doubt anything will change. Even then, I am sure the shit decisions will continue to flow from on high. I am not optimistic about the course of this once great nation. The “good ol days” are long gone my friends.
[quote]theuofh wrote:
I’ll get to another point, which I think is more interesting maybe in the big picture.
If one guy hypothetically were to post a pic/vid of him shouldering the brace, he becomes the nail sticking up and will get the hammer treatment.
If a very large number of people were to post of a pic/vid of themselves shouldering the brace, the guy swinging the hammer is going to look at the situation and start to question if the job of hammering in all these nails is worth it.
I should probably have consulted my lawyer before bringing up this thought experiment, but it seems this sig brace issue presents perhaps the ideal opportunity for a very effective form of peaceful, civil disobedience. It used to be legal, there’s nothing inherently dangerous in the act, and with a little create photoshopping it could even be done anonymously, or close to it, which is very important so they can’t cherry pick who to go after. Somebody could even make a fancy hashtag.
I don’t own a sig brace, am not a social leader, am unsure if this is where the gun community wants to draw a line, but I think if this idea were pitched to me in a bit more refined form I could talked into it.
[/quote]
I just wonder why in the world they don’t just tie all this rifle/not a rifle stuff to barrel length. Something that would make a little sense. Or just get rid of it all together and actually be free and stop writing convoluted laws that have very little relevance to anything other than making innocent people accidental criminals.
I understand the whole point of the “ar pistol” is to get around the stamp and the brace is there to cover the dildo in your face without it.
In some areas the stamp is impossible to get local LEO to sign off on, let alone the stupid wait times, and engraving, etc. (Let’s also not forget it’s an AR. Having multiple uppers (ie: more than one rifle, lol) opens up you to a world of hurt due to “constructive intent” with a young ambitious DA looking to make his way into blue state politics.)
With all the bullshit involved, seems to me you are exponentially better just getting the stamp, and if you can’t, find a different “platform” for lack of a better word, to make a pistol out of. The dildo buffer tube in your face is reason enough.
I’m not saying I agree with the ATF here, I don’t. I’m saying I don’t see the appeal of the AR Pistol in the first place, unless it is a shady run-around your stamp. And if it’s a shady run-around, well we should be focused on fixed the SBR rules, not creating more of a mess because people got caught with a creative “fix” that really isn’t.
[quote]StrengthDawg wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
What is the purpose of a SBR designation? Why was the distinction ever even made, originally?
[/quote]
Back at the end of Prohibition, revolvers and pistols were regulated (taxed) as much as machine guns…[/quote]
Great explanation, thank you.
[quote]StrengthDawg wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]theuofh wrote:
I was contemplating writing a letter to the ATF asking:
If I have an AR w/ the sig brace, shoulder it while unloaded and walk around my house going “pew, pew, pew” pretending to shoot imaginary terrorists, am committing a felony?
Is it still a felony if nobody see’s it?
What if I do it in my backyard, and my neighbor sees me?
What If I post a video of it on youtube?
[/quote]
I think you make a good point that I havent heard discussed much. The ATF letter doesn’t seem to distinguish betweem shouldering the brace, and shouldering the brace with the INTENT TO SHOOT. Whats the difference between shouldering the brace on the range and shouldering the brace while carrying it unloads to your car? According to the letter, both make the weapon an SBR.
[/quote]
A “Rifle” is a weapon designed to be shouldered. A “pistol” is designed to be fired by holding it in the hand. THAT is the defining characteristic and classifies a weapon. It’s not the actual application of the product that defines the weapon. THIS is what the ATF is fucking up. THEY are saying that by SHOULERING the pistol with the sig brace you have “remanufactured” it into an SBR. Actually shooting the gun is irellevant. This whole BATF / NFA gun regs thing is total bullshit.
[/quote]
I understand that and we agree that the application of the brace shouldn’t define the weapon… but it does according to the letter.
BATF / NFA regs are complete bullshit, I agree there.
The sad thing is that it has morphed into a system where as long as you have enough cash you can have whatever you want (within reason). To me it is disenfranchises those with less cash extremely.
[quote]Bauber wrote:
BATF / NFA regs are complete bullshit, I agree there.
The sad thing is that it has morphed into a system where as long as you have enough cash you can have whatever you want (within reason). To me it is disenfranchises those with less cash extremely.[/quote]
Absolutely.
Class III weapons are great, but I’ll probably never own one and I don’t feel like I’m being seriously deprived of anything. The principle, however, definitely deprives many people of the ability to exercise their rights in practice.
Consider for a moment the barriers to legally carrying a concealed weapon. Each jurisdiction is different, but unless you live in VT, AZ or AK, you will need to pay something to someone that goes above and beyond the cost of buying guns and ammo.
For my state of Maine, I had to pay the following (costs are from memory, possibly off a bit):
State-approved course - $75
Permit application fee - $20
I make good money, $95 is jack squat to me. I also live in a good neighborhood, so my risk of actually getting into an encounter is much lower than someone living in, let’s say, downtown Baltimore. In that respect I’m probably a pretty typical concealed carrier, which is a well-off white man in a good neighborhood who likes to avail himself of all options. Such fees are no real problem for me.
By virtue of demographics, the people who would benefit most from legally carrying a concealed weapon are going to be the ones who will have the hardest time clearing whatever financial hurdles are in place. I’m speaking about minorities and poor people.
To top that off, so-called “progressives” are pushing for things like mandatory insurance for gun owners, yearly qualifications, etc. More hurdles to clear, placing legal, practical self-defense with firearms further out-of-reach for those who would benefit most from it.
If there was any proposal out there that disproportionately limited minorities from exercising any of their rights, progressives would be screaming “racist” from the highest hilltops.
But not with guns. Guns are bad, after all. All of those poor minorities should be thanking gun control supporters, who know what is really best to keep you safe.
[quote]Bauber wrote:
BATF / NFA regs are complete bullshit, I agree there.
The sad thing is that it has morphed into a system where as long as you have enough cash you can have whatever you want (within reason). To me it is disenfranchises those with less cash extremely.[/quote]
Correct. That is the goal. People think that big government people are there to “protect” the little person. No, big government people are there to keep you down. Doesn’t matter which party, Democrat or Republican.
[quote]twojarslave wrote:
[quote]Bauber wrote:
BATF / NFA regs are complete bullshit, I agree there.
The sad thing is that it has morphed into a system where as long as you have enough cash you can have whatever you want (within reason). To me it is disenfranchises those with less cash extremely.[/quote]
Absolutely.
Class III weapons are great, but I’ll probably never own one and I don’t feel like I’m being seriously deprived of anything. The principle, however, definitely deprives many people of the ability to exercise their rights in practice.
Consider for a moment the barriers to legally carrying a concealed weapon. Each jurisdiction is different, but unless you live in VT, AZ or AK, you will need to pay something to someone that goes above and beyond the cost of buying guns and ammo.
For my state of Maine, I had to pay the following (costs are from memory, possibly off a bit):
State-approved course - $75
Permit application fee - $20
I make good money, $95 is jack squat to me. I also live in a good neighborhood, so my risk of actually getting into an encounter is much lower than someone living in, let’s say, downtown Baltimore. In that respect I’m probably a pretty typical concealed carrier, which is a well-off white man in a good neighborhood who likes to avail himself of all options. Such fees are no real problem for me.
By virtue of demographics, the people who would benefit most from legally carrying a concealed weapon are going to be the ones who will have the hardest time clearing whatever financial hurdles are in place. I’m speaking about minorities and poor people.
To top that off, so-called “progressives” are pushing for things like mandatory insurance for gun owners, yearly qualifications, etc. More hurdles to clear, placing legal, practical self-defense with firearms further out-of-reach for those who would benefit most from it.
If there was any proposal out there that disproportionately limited minorities from exercising any of their rights, progressives would be screaming “racist” from the highest hilltops.
But not with guns. Guns are bad, after all. All of those poor minorities should be thanking gun control supporters, who know what is really best to keep you safe.
[/quote]
Very well said and couldnt agree more. I try not to think about it because it makes me so angry sometimes how others cant see it this way. I wish conservatives could sell their stance on 2A to minorities the way you stated it here.
I lol’ed
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
17 frame finished for a friend. Finger grooves removed and double trigger guard undercut:
[/quote]
You’re becoming a pro. Those are coming out really nice.
CNC and slide work in your future?
I don’t think govt is consciously trying to limit freedom but the bigger it gets the more it has to look for something to do. Seek “problems” to solve, pass more laws, justify all those people on the payroll.
Without comment
[quote]theuofh wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
17 frame finished for a friend. Finger grooves removed and double trigger guard undercut:
[/quote]
You’re becoming a pro. Those are coming out really nice.
CNC and slide work in your future? [/quote]
Oh man I don’t think I will be doing any slidework… but then again at this point last year I told myself I would never do something as crazy as stippling one of my frames lol. Thanks for the compliment I’ve really been obsessed with stippling lately.
Here is my brand new P320 I have been whoring out everywhere else so figured I would put it here as well. Really exited about this thing and what Sig is doing with it.
Compact
