Regarding LOP; Q posted this image to their instagram



The only "ruling" the ATF has is buried somewhere stating the LOP for shoulder fired weapons is typically 13.5"-some larger number. And they've been using that as a gauge to arbitrarily decide design intent. Which is ridiculous, but then again so is just about everything they do when it comes to arbitrary decision making and enforcing it as law.

quote:

Originally posted by 83v45magna:
Their brace design is proprietary. I am wondering, do they submit a prototype to BATF for approval prior to production, or do they just make it and hope it flies?

The specific design is proprietary, but it's made by SB Tactical, who probably know a thing or two about making braces. And no, you're not required to submit anything to the ATF for a determination before bringing it to market, this is only done pre-emptively by a manufacturer when a new product that may or may not be breaking the rules is developed - like the Franklin smoothbore thing, or Sig's not-a-suppressor barrel extension. There was no reason to expect this given the market saturation with braces and previous determinations/opinions. Which is why Q's legal team included a baker's dozen pieces of precedent regarding what the ATF has published on this.

quote:

Originally posted by Oat_Action_Man:
As I read that letter, it's specifically that brace, not other braces.

So I'm curious why that one in particular as well.

Except the ATF requested a Sugar Weasel sample for determination, which uses an SBA3 brace, and is for all intents and purposes a pretty basic AR pistol with a brace, no different than what Springfield, Sig, Ruger, and dozens of other manufacturers are currently selling as pistols.

quote:

Originally posted by honestlou:
A “brace” doesn’t have a length of pull. Or a cheek weld. Or product videos showing it repeatedly being shouldered. This last one I haven’t personally seen, but I read that in their Instagram page they only showed it shouldered.

This entire “brace” thing is a gift from the ATF. Throwing it in their face is not a good idea.

When I say it’s a gift, I mean it’s a gift of a workaround to the SBR requirements. I am NOT saying I’m in favor of the NFA, but it is the current law.

Agreed, but at the same time the ATF themselves opened the can of worms TWICE when they decided that a brace is not a stock, and that shouldering a brace does not, in fact, redesign the weapon.

The fact that they went out of their way to determine THIS specifically doesn't qualify because they determined it to be designed to be shouldered goes against their own precedent. I don't know if Q's website description was sloppy with the wording and that's what burned them, but the fact that the exact same brace is being used by Noveske on their Gen4 PDWs like the Ghetto Blaster and Space Invader and those weren't mentioned, nor did the ATF state that the brace itself was the issue means that this is likely allllll kinds of bullshit.

I figured .gov/ .atf wouldn't bow their heads and utter a simple "mea culpa"...but I thought for sure they would go for a brace redesign, if, for no other reason, than to give the appearance of being reasonable.

nhracecraft, based on the latest Q update, I'd like to encourage you to consider editing your thread title to reflect something along the lines of an Action Alert, requesting members to start hitting their contact lists in response to this ATF action. Time to crank up the machine and start rattling the cage...moreso right before an election.

I'm not sure whether the Suppressed subforum or the Gun Control Discussion subforum receives more traffic, but you might consider requesting this thread be moved to Gun Control.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
nhracecraft, based on the latest Q update, I'd like to encourage you to consider editing your thread title ....

I agree and was hoping to see it.
I am very surprised, however, that even with the present title that this issue has not received more attention here, and especially as this isn't the only thread on the topic.

Are people not paying it any attention?
Do they believe it is nothing to be concerned about because the letter was issued by a subordinate office and not the headquarters?
Do they just not care?
Is it, "It will go away if I ignore it"?

Very odd.

Q needs to pursue whatever the next administrative or judicial remedy is. ATF is an executove agency that has enforced the law in an arbitrary manner. This whole pistol brace thing needs to be pushed to finality.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Very odd.

Yes, I'm disappointed as well. I dunno...is everyone preoccupied by C-19? The riots? Maybe everyone is focused on the upcoming elections?

The erosion of 2A rights has been going on for years, and this sudden, arbitrary 180 by the ATF is just one more example.

Whatever the reason, I'd like to think that we, as 2A supporters, have enough bandwidth to be able to put up a fight on this issue while dealing with other worthy issues. I believe that politicians, and the bureaucrats that work for them, are much more likely to be responsive to complaints about arbitrary administrative actions right before a contentious election, and now is the time to act on this.

Between the NRA-ILA alert for action and the suggestions Kevin Brittingham made in requesting help, there are actions we can take...and, tomorrow being a Columbus Day holiday, might not be a bad time for 2A supporters who have the day off to start working this issue.

Let's strike while the iron is hot!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Modern Day Savage,

Using the stock "Bump" feature, to move this to the top.

^^^^
I see what you did there...always appreciate your views from the banana tree and the monkeyisms that fall from it.

...and, your point is well taken. It wasn't so long ago that we, as 2A supporters, lost out on the Bump Stock issue. Let's not let that happen on the pistol brace issue as well.

I'd like to know what the folks who are in this fight in a big way are doing? SB Tactical, Tailhook, Sig are the three big ones with major investment in the brace (vs. stabilizer like KAK) that I can think of off the top of my head. Plus, I'm not really understanding why the ATF isn't jumping on them. Are they picking fights with the small timers and forcing them out, and then planning on using that "precedent" to force out the big sellers?

Also, where are the attorneys screaming 5th Amendment "Takings" Clause? These were legal and not, ipse dixit, they're not, and so just suck up that $100 (plus or minus whatever) you paid for the thing we said was okay but is now a major felony?

Bump for an Update to the OP....Urgent Action Required!

Everyone should view the embedded video posted by Chowser (2nd post on this page), which is an update from Kevin Brittingham re: the Honey Badger Pistol reclassification. ATF has 'Gone Dark' and no longer responding to 'Q' regarding this matter. This could mean that they're trying to figure out how to respond/change course and not look bad, or something more dire!

It's clear that 'Q' got to the point where ATF would no longer respond/communicate with them, and was left with no choice but to go public with an announcement, advising current customers on options to 'Stay Within the Law' until this is resolved.

While the Brace design in question is proprietary, VERY similar designs w/ IDENTICAL design features/components are sold by SB Tactical and/or licensed to other Firearms manufacturers. This could affect MILLIONS of Gun Owners, and is especially problematic for those located in GDC Ban States where SBR's are verboten!

PLEASE READ All of the linked documents in the OP, and contact EVERYONE; The White House, Senators, Congressmen, as well as, ANY & ALL National Pro 2A orgs (NRA-ILA, GOA, SAF, etc) to Demand Action, and a change in course by ATF! Our Second Amendment Rights are at stake here!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: nhracecraft,

^^^^
Thank you!

All right gang, time to hit the contact lists, RTFN! Let's roll!

UPDATE - Received the following via email from Q LLC today:

'Q' Issued 60-Day Cease & Desist Suspension

Last Friday, October 9, 2020, our attorneys received a letter from ATF Chief Counsel Joel Roessner “temporarily suspending the Cease and Desist letter” associated with the Honey Badger Pistol by Q®. The letter states that the suspension, “will remain in effect for a period of sixty (60) days . . . unless withdrawn or extended by ATF.” The stated purpose of the suspension is to allow the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) an opportunity, “to further review the applicability of the National Firearms Act to the manufacture and transfer of the model ‘Honey Badger Pistol’ firearm.”

Our attorneys quickly followed up to inquire if the underlying Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division evaluation was also suspended but have not received a response. Regardless, until we are told otherwise by the U.S. government of a permanent decision, we must assume that the suspension of the Cease and Desist letter does not impact the ATF’s position that the Honey Badger Pistol is a National Firearms Act (“NFA”) weapon, as the ATF could arbitrarily withdraw the suspension at any time.

We believe this 60-day suspension is an effort to put manufacturers, distributors, and consumers at ease, and to postpone the issue past the presidential election in hopes that a new administration will take a different view. Using licensees as political pawns is unbecoming of a regulatory agency and ignoring the underlying evaluation in this letter is simply irresponsible. Q will not succumb to this level or irresponsibility. Therefore, without further clarification from ATF on their evaluation, we will not continue manufacturing the Honey Badger Pistol.

Once again, we urge you to continue the pressure and contact the Department of Justice (ATF’s parent agency) by using this Take Action link provided by the National Rifle Association.

Additionally, we encourage you to continue reaching out to the White House and ask President Trump to halt and rollback ATF’s efforts to issue arbitrary and capricious decisions affecting millions of legal gun owners.

White House Comment Line:
Phone: (202) 456-1111
Email: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

ATF Counsel Letter - Temp. Suspension of Cease & Desist Order

Came across this video from a week ago. In the interview with Colion Noir, Kevin Brittingham mentions that the ATF balked at the Honey Badger PSB LOP, but he goes on to mention that they, once again arbitrarily, changed the commonly understood way in which it is measured, and if measured by the accepted standard, the Honey Badger PSB does come in to the industry accepted < 13.5".

He also points out that the ATF evaluation gun design criteria comes down to a case by case examination, and that they don't seem to have, or at least stray away from, any set criteria for gun manufacturers to follow.

It appears that the ATF has either focused their regulatory wrath specifically on his company, as a smaller gun manufacturer...or, this is the preliminary legal action on a smaller company before pushing forward their attack on larger manufacturers.





Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuNvgFfrcAI

MAC at Military Arms is doing a live stream right now with SB Tactical on the brace issues as I type...

https://youtu.be/9sP99XzoQnk

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
MAC at Military Arms is doing a live stream right now with SB Tactical on the brace issues as I type...

https://youtu.be/9sP99XzoQnk

I just finished watching the live stream and found it very interesting. It was enlightening to hear what Alex Bosco had to say with regards to his crusade for pushing the ATF to establish industry guidelines that manufacturers could consistently follow in a good faith attempt to remain in compliance, and their unwillingness to do so. It smacks of an agency resistant to being hemmed in by oversight or by the very rules that they establish, and instead seem to prefer arbitrary rule making.

I've been pointing out the complicated, capricious, poorly conceived and poorly written laws that legislators pass for years now, and not just in regards to firearms. To make matters worse, after legislators pass nonsensical impractical laws, they then hand them off to regulatory agencies where there is enough gray area in the laws that the bureaucrats have the latitude to then exercise additional arbitrary capricious inconsistent rule making.

Firearms manufacturers, accessory mfrs, ammo mfrs, and gun owners really need to amp up the pressure and demand some clear guidelines and consistency from a regulatory agency like the ATF, that directly affects the Second Amendment.

It's too early to see what, if any, affect that FRAC has, but I'm encouraged to see a new organization join the fight to defend 2A! We need all the help we can get.

Bisleyblackhawk thanks for the heads-up on the live stream! It was worth the hour.

^^^'FRAC'?? Help me out here. Numerous queries via Google return Nothing!

I'm all out of guesses, Alex....Need to 'Phone a Friend'

^^^^
Sorry about that. Last night, during the live stream discussion by Tim of MAC and Alex of SB Tactical, posted above by Biseleyblackhawk, after they lay out some of the ongoing problems at the ATF and, based on both the timing of the C&D issuance, the timing of the suspension, not to mention the arbitrary inconsistent application of the recent rulings, it appears the ATF's current actions are politically motivated, and so the discussion turns towards politics first, and later, organizations that are working to protect the Second Amendment.

Until watching the live stream last night, I had never heard of them, but there is a new organization that has been formed, with a more focused effort to defend the 2A.

FRAC- Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition

From their website:

Policy and Legal

All American industries deserve the ability to operate in a predictable regulatory environment. But for years, the firearms industry has been subject to secret determination letters, policies that change without public input, and shifting subjective standards. Firearm importers, manufacturers, and innovators need clear and consistent laws and effective policies in order to successfully operate. Importers are regularly forced to wait over a year to have new models evaluated by the government for importation, only to receive a denial for reasons that are nowhere to be found in the regulations or guidance. Manufacturers and innovators are strong-armed into recalling tens of thousands of firearms because government makes post hoc determinations that certain configurations are suddenly illegal.

An industry cannot effectively conduct business in this environment. That’s why the FRAC is standing up for industry members everywhere – from the halls of Congress where we will weigh in on legislation, to the administrative agencies where we will promote industry interests before federal regulators, to the courts where we will fight to defend the rights of the firearm industry and promote good government and the rule of law.

Our Mission

FRAC’s sole mission is to aggressively advocate for and defend firearms, ammunition, and accessories manufacturers and importers from government overreach. This includes holding the government accountable for arbitrary and capricious policies and rulings and ensuring that the government’s regulation of the industry is conducted in an open and transparent manner.

FRAC will be the leading advocate of firearms manufacturers, importers, and their customers before federal regulatory agencies.

Another live stream by MAC on the pistol brace thing...




Link to original video: https://youtu.be/S3YFnc9yCPA

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Another live stream by MAC on the pistol brace thing...

Just finished watching this live stream between Tim of MAC and Kevin Brittingham of Q.

All in all, not a whole lot of new info, although I still found parts of it interesting as both the previous interview with Alex and this one with Kevin gave a little inside baseball info with a glimpse into the firearms industry that many of us aren't familiar with.

A few points from the discussion:

- Brittingham mentioned that in the 27 or so years of having an FFL, he has had a great relationship with the ATF, when he ran his various companies in the South. He started his company Q 4 years ago, based in Hew Hampshire, which falls under the ATF Boston field office, and now is the first time he has ever had a complaint or serious problem from them, and he believes the Boston office, being in a more liberal jurisdiction, is likely the reason it is happening now.

- As Kevin smiled and explained what a joke the ATF tech branch document was in regards to the arbitrary unclear points that it made when evaluating the Honey Badger PSB, Tim specifically asked him if he would release the document publicly and Kevin said he wanted to, but after speaking to a lawyer about doing so he replied "do you want the ATF to Waco your shop?".

...so it looks like, at least for now, the tech branch letter will not be released.

- Kevin mentioned that he is very appreciative of all the gun owner support he has received, along with all the industry support he has received...however, he said that so far, not a single other gun manufacturer has reached out to him to offer support, and he appeared to be a little miffed by this. He believes that he is just the test case and, depending on the outcome of the election, he believes this issue will ripple out from just being directed at him, to the entire industry that deals with PSBs, and gun manufacturers really need to come together now to make a stand.

- He pointed out that his company had a backlog of orders even prior to this year and that he produces a few different platforms that are not pistol/ brace dependent and that he would survive for several years just making SBRs, so the pistol issue isn't a make or break issue for him...however he believes other small gun manufacturers are much more dependent on pistol/ brace designs and they may have a tough time making it if the brace is removed as an option.

Interestingly, apparently they have other designs sitting on shelves, depending on the outcome of the election, which makes sense to me, but not something I had previously considered.

- Brittingham believes that it was only after 2A supporters started contacting the White House, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and their congressman and senators, and the NRA and GOA, did the White House and DOJ finally lean on the ATF, and this opposition is what prompted the C&D suspension. Tim and Kevin are still urging 2A supporters to contact the White House, the DOJ, NRA and GOA and other 2A support organizations, and your elected reps, and keep the opposition and complaints coming!

I realize that, with the upcoming election, not to mention the ongoing pandemic and economic issues and riots, that 2A supporters have a lot on their minds right now and a lot of demands being placed on their time, but, even if you don't own a gun with a PSB, this is a vitally important issue that could very well lead to additional erosion of gun rights, so please take a few minutes to contact the White House, the DOJ, the NRA and other gun rights groups, and your elected reps, and express your concerns about this issue!