-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Email from Q - ATF issues Cease & Desist for Honey Badger Pistol *UPDATE*
- Thread starter DXT_Shooter
- Start date
I got it too. This should get interesting for sure, certainly opens a can of worms. If that’s a “stock” then so is pretty much every brace on the market.
It’s right on their website go to it and it’s right at the top.
May as well just stock up and ditch the brace. Drilled a lower yesterday, about to order more!
Yep. And this likely hints at where the ATF intends to go with every brace on the market. Buckle up...
I’m just waiting for the epic memes that should follow soon.
Why I have two SBRs and not two pistols. Because braces were only protected by an easily reversible letter based on judgment.
^tnis is why the right side loses.
Sbr owners be like haha f your braces suckers.
Left would all be like FATF
Sbr owners be like haha f your braces suckers.
Left would all be like FATF
I kind of see your point, but I'm not laughing at brace owners. Was more of a statement saying I don't trust the government to be able to do absolutely anything correct.
If I wanted to make a joke, and laugh at braces and owners of them. I would have. But I didn't, I'm an asshole, not a jackass. If I had it my way, I would take our cake back.
The pistol in question is not really an different than lots of others that come from the factory in very similar configurations.
Me thinks that the ATF wants to hurt Trump's re-election chances by throwing a spanner in the works that Trump is too stupid and vain to realize will hurt him...
Me thinks that the ATF wants to hurt Trump's re-election chances by throwing a spanner in the works that Trump is too stupid and vain to realize will hurt him...
Read the whole letter in that link. ATF calls out the Sugar Weasel too saying it’s may be a SBR and it uses a SBA3 brace which is the most common brace on the market.
Given the timeline one the dating of the letter and Gaetz letters wording about ATF wanting to ban one of the most common braces, my guess is that there has been a fight behind the scenes for the last couple months. Q just aired this about a letter two months ago, makes me wonder if they know something we don’t. Given KB’s connections, my guess is yes.
Yikes! I thought the ATF could not create laws or interpret them, only enforce laws that have been voted in.
This is the first time that I've learned anything about the Honey Badger pistol and the brace. So I did a google search on the pistol and the brace.
It doesn't look that much different than other pistol braces. Why does the ATF object to this one? What is it about the Honey Badger pistol that the ATF claims it is an SBR?
It doesn't look that much different than other pistol braces. Why does the ATF object to this one? What is it about the Honey Badger pistol that the ATF claims it is an SBR?
I’m not a lawyer, but it is my feeling is that the collapsing nature of the brace is what is getting it into trouble. I read somewhere, quite a while ago, that one feature of a “braced pistol” that the atf looked at was the LOP. If the lop was short enough to not be comfortable to the average shooter, then it skated. But, if a brace got into the “normal” rifle stock lop, then it was on the wrong side of the opinion.
It could be and just my opinion that the ATF and others are cringing every time someone builds an AR pistol and they miss out on snatching another $200 out of your pocket for a stupid fucking stamp.
I understand that, but this could easily be made into a slippery slope argument. The ball starts rolling somewhere.
Could you clarify? Does the Honey Badger have an LOP over 13.5 inches? In addition, they LOP has to be measured straight back from the trigger.
I read somewhere that it was an overall length issue? Under 26"?
To short to be a pistol FATF logic...
To short to be a pistol FATF logic...
Its not this. OAL has nothing to do with pistol unless you want to add a VFG making it a firearm (with OAL >26")
For those mentioning LOP, how can you have a LOP on a “brace”. I’m certain that this has nothing to dot with the “extended length of the brace”. Read the whole letter where the specifically mention the mini fix pistol and sugar weasel as well...
I’d be willing to bet good money that ATF wants to come after braces and this is testing the waters with a niche gun to see if it’s overturned in court or if their new ruling can hold water. Just read Gaetz original letter and the wording of it, the wording suggests an extremely common brace that there’s a shit ton of, not a HB pistol that there’s a few thousand of.
I’d be willing to bet good money that ATF wants to come after braces and this is testing the waters with a niche gun to see if it’s overturned in court or if their new ruling can hold water. Just read Gaetz original letter and the wording of it, the wording suggests an extremely common brace that there’s a shit ton of, not a HB pistol that there’s a few thousand of.
Response letter from Q's attorney.
This is why the email mentioned if you had another AR pistol you could retain the upper and lower as long as not assembled. You have a valid use for the upper.
The other aspect of why just removing the "brace" doesn't count is the fact that the lower is part of that brace by its design. So really can't "take it apart", you are modifying it which is a no no.
IANAL and the above is my opinion and observation based on what has happened before.
Last edited:
I suppose there's an argument to be made for banning future PRODUCTION of braces, though I don't agree with it. But what's the legal ground for banning an item produced and purchased legally. Or levying an excise tax on an item years after it's been purchased? Where else does this nonsense occur?
Pre '86 cars don't get pulled off the road because they don't pass DOT safety standards. Old buildings aren't demolished because they don't meet ADA guidelines. Even pre '86 MG's are grandfathered in. What is this bullshit?
Pre '86 cars don't get pulled off the road because they don't pass DOT safety standards. Old buildings aren't demolished because they don't meet ADA guidelines. Even pre '86 MG's are grandfathered in. What is this bullshit?
Remember bump stocks.....
Funny how Obama's ATF gave us cool stuff... Trump's ATF....
Makes me think the ATF is playing politics to help Democrats and hurt Republicans.
Chevron Deference ... Google is your friend.
This one actually dates back a couple months to the original letter that was being circulated:
If you thought gun confiscation was going to be a bunch of brown UN troops in blue helmets going door to door, here's the reality. Ask any AA-12 owners how they feel about the ATF's treatment of them over the most ridiculous bullshit reason ever. The ATF is going to do whatever the fuck it feels like, whenever it wants.
I'm a dumbass, but, I always thought an AR pistol, was measured from the barrel crown to the end of the buffer tube, or, am I full of shit?? IF this is correct, pistols use pistol buffer tubes, which are shorter than rifle/carbine buffer tubes. I know nothing about the HB, so, isn't a pistol OAL, just at 26", or an 1/8"-1/4" longer?
I'm really trying to NOT be a dumbass, just trying to learn. Mac
I'm really trying to NOT be a dumbass, just trying to learn. Mac
Yep. The bureaucracy is in charge of interpreting, enforcing, and changing its own rules which have the force of law.... without a law being passed.
Short story: we may need 1776 again.
Most interesting argument I found was they did not provide guidance on what constitutes a pistol brace vs a stock. The lawyers argument will force the ATF to come up with guidelines which I am assuming could not be considered for retroactive application. I really hope Trump steps his ass up, because he has been slacking badly on 2a.
Yup, I support Trump. At best, he's been neutral on 2A. That's one of only a handful of things that bug me about him.
Similar threads
