Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns New backup gun

Company called Shockwave, 40 bucks I think, another 20 for the KAK tube

"Shockwave"... sounds like a fitting name.... I'll bet that puppy is Loud.... cheek weld shooting without very good hearing protection would likely be hmmm, unpleasant.

The sudden sight of it might just scare a bad guy to death thought

Is it fun to shoot?

There's a lot of dangerous information in this thread.

The ATF most certainly did refer to their earlier letter and they made it very clear that if you shoulder a stabilizing device you have created an unregistered SBR.

That's stupid and nearly impossible to enforce. But it's also stupid to give erroneous legal advice on the Internet.

https://www.atf.gov/file/11816/download

The actual law hinges on what a "shoulder stock" is.

In this thread, among knowledgeable gun enthusiasts, there was confusion about what the brace was because it looks like a shoulder stock. So it looks like a shoulder stock, and you use it like a shoulder stock.

Does anyone here want to try to convince a jury that the thing that looks like a shoulder stock and you used just like a shoulder stock, ISN'T a shoulder stock? Good luck with that.

The jury will see it for what it is, a failed and ridiculous attempt at acquiring an SBR without the hassle and expense of an ATF stamp.

I hate that the law exists as it is and I would never enforce it. But it is what it is. And people need to fully comprehend exactly what the law is, how their actions will be perceived and how those two things will affect them before they decide what course of action to take.

I'd love to throw up a big middle finger to the ATF and live life with an unregistered SBR slung over my shoulder. But that wouldn't be fair to my wife and kids who are depending on me to be there for them. So $200 (or in my case a 16" barrel) are worth being able to watch my kids grow up.

Not giving advice. Merely arguing my position. Opinions in personal letters don't establish laws. Laws must be promulgated to be enforceable. The first opinion letter, however, had the advantage of being consistent with the law as it's written. The second letter has no such advantage. Nor does it make any legal sense. There is no legal precedent whereby the method of firing an unaltered firearm can alter its classification.

We don't need to convince anyone of that fact. The ATF already signed off on the fact that it's not an NFA firearm, thus legal sales to the public under the category of handgun, thus the ATF already designated the brace as a non-shoulder stock.

I'm speaking specifically of those handguns made by Sig with their particular brace installed at the factory.

This is my take as well. While its enough to make me cautious of how I employ this gun in front of others, it not enough for me not to own one or use it how I see fit should the need arise.

I could rally give 2 sh*ts what 2 different ATF analysts have said, its just their opinion. Im sure at some time in the future this play out in court but it wont be me on the hook. I know the ins and outs and pitfalls. I'll play by the rules in public. Its a purpose built gun and serves it purpose perfectly and legally.

Yeah, if im shooting without earpro, i'll take the unpleasantness over the alternative

Of course its fun. More importantly, very handy in a vehicle and indoors.

Warpig, I think your approach is reasonable. I generally take that approach myself.

PS Sig is currently in the process of bringing suit against the ATF for letter number 2. They seek to require them to support the statement with law, which they won't be able to do.

Looks like a "backpack gun" to me.

Cool not-rifle.




Travis

Sig makes it. The one in the opening post is a civilian legal version of the current Swiss Military rifle.

Close but not quite. The current Swiss rifle is the 551 series, this this is a 556 series, the primary difference being the magzine. AR type vs STANAG.

The 551A1 would be a better example.

hahaha

Yes, I knew that the mags were different in that the American version took AR mags. As I recall, they go for somewhere in the range of $1500.00, right?

Sig Challenges ATF Letter No. 2

like anything else, just depends on where you look. I paid 899.00 for my rifle and jsut under a 1k for the pistol. Sig has since moved away from the 556 and is pushing the 556xi which will disappear soon with the MCX/MPX and 516 release.

I dont believe they actually challenged anything to date, they said they might int he future.

Just be careful, BATFE is starting to lose their sense of humor on the "shooting brace"; I fully expect in the next year they'll declare them to no longer be a "brace" and just label them a buttstock. I'm sure they're working with their legal department right now to try to define what constitutes a stock vs. what's a spring tube vs. what's a "brace" (if they even allow a brace anymore). So keep your ear to the ground, it's expected they'll invalidate all the letters they sent out and declare all the braces a stock.

They have already said anyone seen shooting a "pistol" equipped with a "brace" to be in violation of the law.

But your 556 is DAMN cool!!!

They never said that. he whole point of the brace was to assist in shooting the pistol. Thats still true as of today.