ATF decides Honey Badger AR Pistol is SBR

Look a the Q Honey Badger with the "brace" fully extended. The LOP is quite long. My understanding is the Q didn't get prior ATF approval of their "brace" setup, and have a sneaking suspicion that they were trying to see just how far they could go.
 
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then is a ???.

The title of the topic is untrue but is good click bait. Peoples arms and forearms come in all sorts of different sizes and strength to hold weight. Q’s “brace” is not only made of hard polymer but they didn’t even make it curved on the inside to help give it a better fit.

Fyi I have a SBA3 brace and realize that redefining it to be a SBR is a risk I assumed when I brought it.
 
BSA1 said:
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then is a ???.

The title of the topic is untrue but is good click bait. Peoples arms and forearms come in all sorts of different sizes and strength to hold weight. Q’s “brace” is not only made of hard polymer but they didn’t even make it curved on the inside to help give it a better fit.

Fyi I have a SBA3 brace and realize that redefining it to be a SBR is a risk I assumed when I brought it.
Click to expand...

The title of this thread is misleading.
The ATF is only going after one brand of AR pistol.
Click to expand...

Who didn't see this coming? So the Honey Badger has some weird little gimlet of a difference from other braced AR pistols. Oops. Do you think the ATF is going to stop there, with Gabby Gifford and her ilk pushing them (she started this, I think, or her group did).

The good news is that if there is going to be a fight let it be on technicalities and definitions and not because some whacko sneaked one of these into a theater and killed 40 people. That was always my concern.

And, yes, the law needs to be changed, deleted, whatever - when the GOP has both houses again, and the White House, then, MAYBE. Otherwise, no matter how reasonable, and there is a reasonable new bill in progress, it's not going to get through the HofR.

Here's fun question for you - if the ATF outlaws AR pistols what do you do with yours?

Follow up - if the ATF decides that any AR pistol with an arm brace is an AOW and requires a tax stamp will you get one? $5 or $200 - what will you do?
 
I do not like this. I have an AR-9 pistol that has an 11.5" barrel. It is fitting through the loophole but it was legal when I built it and it is legal now. There was a time it was not legal. Fun to shoot and stupid accurate.
 
I Googled "Honey Badger", and this was the first pic I saw at the "Q" website,

IMHO, that brace would strap to my arm,,,

HB-PISTOL-RIGHT-CLOSED-768x240.jpg


Maybe HB is coming around? :cool:
 
Watching a YouTube video by MrGunsAndGear, this might be the case of a rogue field agent in Boston being a Trump hater and trying to get gun owners hating on Trump. Field agents never issue these kinds of rulings. So stay tuned.
 
SweetMK said:
I Googled "Honey Badger", and this was the first pic I saw at the "Q" website,

IMHO, that brace would strap to my arm,,,

HB-PISTOL-RIGHT-CLOSED-768x240.jpg


Maybe HB is coming around? :cool:
Click to expand...
I read on another forum the "LOP" on a brace can't be more than 13.5", extended.
AFAIK, the blade type braces have passed muster as long as they are short enough.
I put a SBA brace on a 20 gauge Shockwave but decided I liked the ergonomics of the birdshead grip much better.
 
Gamecock said:
Time to amend the NFA. Remove restrictions on SBRs and "sawed off shotguns." As well as silencers. They are not unreasonable threats to society.
Click to expand...

I agree, but thats not going to happen.

Just loo at simple suppressors. They are just an attachment. The law doesn't stop a single person bent on murder, they do save hearing. Yet the legislation the make them an non issue went no where except the garbage cans.
 
Watch the interviews between Colion Niore and the owner of PDW Brace and then the one with the owner of Q.
 
Last edited:
it would be nice to have a rule book everyone can follow...
without that it is just targeted arbitrary enforcement...
I have always had difficulty with "because I say so" from anyone...
 
Brace, no Brace, ATF, KGB, LMNOP, Come and take it. Folks either your Free or a Slave. ATF OK's something Honest folks abide by, then arrest them when they change the law...Like the 1980's Street Sweepers, M14 receivers re-welded, Bump stocks etc. Me...Na Im done.... No more giving in.... come take them.
 
Mrnurse said:
Brace, no Brace, ATF, KGB, LMNOP, Come and take it. Folks either your Free or a Slave. ATF OK's something Honest folks abide by, then arrest them when they change the law...Like the 1980's Street Sweepers, M14 receivers re-welded, Bump stocks etc. Me...Na Im done.... No more giving in.... come take them.
Click to expand...

Yup, same here.
 
take the stock.. oops... brace off... its a pistol... why you got it in the first place.. not that anyone was trying to skate thru a loophole
 
Go to almost any public range where AR's are seen in use and you'll see that most, as in almost all, Pistol AR's are shot with the arm brace against the shoulder. This is a usage that Violates the intent of the prior ATF rulings that Arm Braces may be mounted on a Pistol. At some point I fully expect that the ATF will issue a ruling that Arm Braces aren't legal and instantly turn a lot of AR pistols into SBR's. All because those who currently own these variants won't even be a tiny bit discrete about how these arm braces are used.

That said in this particular case the reason for this ruling is very obvious. I have always had smaller wrists and skinny forearms, enough so that I can reach areas in an engine compartment that would have others pulling the engine to get to. Looking at the pics of this pistol it appears to me that there is absolutely no chance at all that I could slide my arm thru that "arm brace". If Q mfg had made even a tiny attempt to make this an actual arm brace this would not have happened. So the blame for this ruling is on Q, they should have built that stock (oops, arm brace) so that it actually could be used as an arm brace by a grown adult.
 
Although I truly believe that the Bill of Rights was meant to follow MNurse's definitions, at this point it is kind of like believing in Santa Claus for all the good it does.

If the any of the Alphabets ever show up at your home with a warrant, it won't matter is the "brace" is on or off. They are going to find something that they can prosecute you for. By the time it is over your guilt or innocence isn't going to matter all that much. Unless your real rich to start out, your going to be broke and even rich guys who oppose the regime in power often find themselves broke or behind bars. At many of our ages, the difference between prison and a low dollar retirement home isn't all that great.

I don't have much use for the AR type "pistols" the braces, bump stocks, or any of those other deals. What I do have is a firm belief that the right to keep and bear arms isn't about duck hunting or target shooting.

The BATF or any other Alphabet doesn't get to have a free hand in making up laws and deciding what they mean. Neither does congress or even the President.

To me the 2nd means if you want a Ma duce mounted on top your car when you drive through McDonald's you should be able to have one, if it goes under the low clearance deal.

If a person doesn't believe in the true meaning of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights they should not be in government.

I still can dream can't I?
 
Last edited:
The **eff released a letter about two years ago reversing their previous ruling you could not shoulder the brace because it was so silly, stating doing so did not change the intentional design of the brace. Sorta like, you can take your car on a NASCAR track, but that doesn't turn it into a race car.
Q's brace is/was approved by the feds and manufactured by SB tactical, the same brace is used on other pistols from other larger companies, but a field agent (that doesn't have this authority) issued the cease and desist letter to Q. It will be overturned I'm sure because (he) singled out this one company. It's all about politics and it's about to get ugly.
Bottom line, if your pistol measures 13.5" or less from the trigger to the back of the extended brace you're legal (provided your barrel is of legal length or less). The filed agent intentionally fudged these measurements and based his decision on that. (he purposely measured at an angle to come up over).
All this is in the two interviews with Colion Niore, I urge y'all to watch them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CH4
Bondi Making Adjustments to ATF
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
BC38
BC38
GaryS
Texas et al. v. ATF
Replies
19
Views
2K
rosewood
rosewood
W
New ATF proposals
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
delcrossv
delcrossv
Magnum_PI
ATF attempting to come after private sellers...
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
4K
bushmaster1313
bushmaster1313
H
My decision on the ATF's PAB Ban
Replies
2
Views
862
hardluk1
H

Latest posts

Back
Top