Sig brace still worth it?

[photogpat]

I'll just leave this link here. http://shortbarrelshepherd.com/

I agree 5.56 in anything less than 11" is most likely a waste of time and effort...but don't be so quick to throw out one in 300BLK.

I deer hunted with my 8.5" 300BLK this year and took a deer at 75yds with my handloads. It's awfully nice carrying a deer hunting firearm weighing less than 5lbs in your backpack...thats accurate out to >200yds...

All for less than $500, not including the optic.

(I may have drank a little too much of the kool aid...I know)

[UnaStamus]

There are .300BLK loads that are optimized for 8-9" barrels. The benefit to the .300BLK is that it has a much faster rate of powder burn than 5.56, and it produces more energy faster due to the heavier projectile and faster powder burn. The problem goes back to whether a pistol AR is really worthwhile, or if it's just more advantageous to get an SBR. It ultimately comes down to what you want out of he gun.

[gaberelli]

Here's a relevant image that I saw posted somewhere else.




Heinous typos thanks to autocorrect.

[Bearcatrp]

Did that come from ATF or did someone make that up? Good info on it though.

[gaberelli]

Did that come from ATF or did someone make that up? Good info on it though.

Not the ATF. Just something I stumbled across on the interwebz.


Heinous typos thanks to autocorrect.

[CZscout]

Sig Brace on sale! $88

http://www.amazon.com/Sig-Sauer-Adjusta ... _200_img_2

[Holland&Holland]

Here's a relevant image that I saw posted somewhere else.




Heinous typos thanks to autocorrect.

What is people's take on #1? I get the constructive intent but should it not be a yellow triangle rather than a red x?

[Ghost]

What is people's take on #1? I get the constructive intent but should it not be a yellow triangle rather than a red x?

My understanding is you either are in trouble for something else or you pissed somebody off that you shouldn't have if you get in trouble for constructive intent. If you originally built the rifle from a stripped lower, it seems that if you had a pistol buffer ready to swap on then you could eliminate the worry.

[goosed]

What is people's take on #1? I get the constructive intent but should it not be a yellow triangle rather than a red x?

It's definitely a red x... Not sure how it meets due process requirements, but per below you're guilty no proof of actual wrong doing needed.

A firearm, as defined by the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3), is
made when unassembled parts are placed in close proximity in such a way that they: (a)
serve no useful purpose other than to make a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than
16 inches in length; or (b) convert a complete weapon into such an NFA firearm.

[Holland&Holland]

What is people's take on #1? I get the constructive intent but should it not be a yellow triangle rather than a red x?

It's definitely a red x... Not sure how it meets due process requirements, but per below you're guilty no proof of actual wrong doing needed.

A firearm, as defined by the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3), is
made when unassembled parts are placed in close proximity in such a way that they: (a)
serve no useful purpose other than to make a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than
16 inches in length; or (b) convert a complete weapon into such an NFA firearm.

I get that but the chart does not state "close proximity" it states has. Just 'cause one owns does not mean close proximity.

[goosed]

I get that but the chart does not state "close proximity" it states has. Just 'cause one owns does not mean close proximity.

Close proximity does not mean distance in this case... the supreme court defined it completely different: "if they serve no purpose other than to make an NFA firearm".
In essence a short upper or barrel has no purpose without a lower, thus per the court's definition it is in close proximity of any lower you own whether it's in the same room, building or even property.

Silly, right?

[xd ED]

I get that but the chart does not state "close proximity" it states has. Just 'cause one owns does not mean close proximity.

Close proximity does not mean distance in this case... the supreme court defined it completely different: "if they serve no purpose other than to make an NFA firearm".
In essence a short upper or barrel has no purpose without a lower, thus per the court's definition it is in close proximity of any lower you own whether it's in the same room, building or even property.

Silly, right?

Why is someone from the atf in your gunroom comparing gun parts?

[goosed]

Why is someone from the atf in your gunroom comparing gun parts?

True, short uppers/barrels(non NFA) aren't firearms and not tracked. The ATF has no of way of knowing if you own any so they wouldn't be in your gun room just for that...
If the slim chance of getting caught makes an illegal activity acceptable is an ethics question. I usually lean towards staying legal, but to each their own.

[Holland&Holland]

Why is someone from the atf in your gunroom comparing gun parts?

True, short uppers/barrels(non NFA) aren't firearms and not tracked. The ATF has no of way of knowing if you own any so they wouldn't be in your gun room just for that...
If the slim chance of getting caught makes an illegal activity acceptable is an ethics question. I usually lean towards staying legal, but to each their own.

Still questioning the illegal assertion. Are there cases where one was convicted just for having a barrel and happened to own an AR as well?

I mean what if you already have one stamp and own a 16 inch AR. Could not argument be made that you intend to put the upper from your registered sir and place on your unregistered one just as easily as this?

[goosed]

Still questioning the illegal assertion. Are there cases where one was convicted just for having a barrel and happened to own an AR as well?

None with an AR yet that I'm aware of... however, Mr. David Owens tried to sell an undercover ATF agent a complete shoulder fired uzi and a short barrel that fit the uzi. Owens was circumventing the law in several other ways as well so there are several other things at play in his case, but part of the conviction was for the uzi/short barrel. If you're so inclined here is the ruling text United States v. Owens, 103 F.3d 953 (11th Cir. 1997)

I mean what if you already have one stamp and own a 16 inch AR. Could not argument be made that you intend to put the upper from your registered sir and place on your unregistered one just as easily as this?

Not sure I am following, but I believe one of these 2 scenarios is what you may have intended to convey?
1.)you have a SBR upper with tax stamp(no lower) and a complete AR rifle = legal, you have the stamp for the SBR for when it goes on the rifle lower
2)you have a SBR upper with stamp on a rifle lower and you own another short upper(no stamp) - illegal, short upper(no stamp) would make an unregistered NFA item per constructive intent. Need either: a separate stamp for each NFA item to be legal or a pistol lower to make the short upper(no stamp) a pistol only upper

Ambiguity still seems to be present with stripped lowers as they are typically not marked 'pistol' or 'rifle' on the form 4473, but instead 'other firearm'.
- If you have a complete rifle, a stripped lower and a short barrel... is the stripped lower(no parts attached) sufficient to meet pistol barrel/pistol lower definition?
- A rifle can't be made into a pistol, but a pistol can be made a rifle then back into a pistol. Is a stripped lower, marked 'other', originally a pistol or rifle or whatever you tell the ATF it was first built into?