12-18-2020, 06:25 AM
I am not trying to defend ATF. They DO, however have the authority to throw my sorry ass in jail, whether I recognize them or not. I see that as a good reason to avoid crossing them. I felt the same way about the EPA when I was in charge of tanker-trucks of acids and hazardous waste.
Nevertheless, as near as I can tell, ATF only approved ONE brace. The one submitted by SB Tactical for approval had the floppy elastomer arm-wrap that made it uncomfortable to shoot from the shoulder and that was clearly stated to be important if the ATF letter. From what I have been able to determine, there are no other designs officially approved by ATF. Determinations, like the 2017 one for that particular SB Tactical brace are done on a case by case basis, so any claims that other braces are ATF-approved are not valid. Other manufacturers could have asked for determinations, but they did not. As you stated, ATF has not given detailed specs on what they would consider compliant, so any company who produced and sold arm braces was foolish to think that it was not a risky venture. They conned their customers if they told them there was no risk. On the other hand, a lot of money was made selling these pistols.
There certainly are people who use the arm braces to shoot their weapon like a pistol. Among those are the handicapped, for whom they were originally designed. I will feel sorry for those people if they lose the opportunity to shoot. On the other hand, many others were betting that they could have a functional SBR without dealing with the NFA. They may well lose that bet.
I personally thought that the arm-braces had a 50/50 chance of staying legal. There was a chance that they would become so ubiquitous that it would be too difficult to try to regulate them. There was also a good chance that they would be used in enough mass killings, shootouts, or robberies that there would be a public outcry for them to be banned. Of course, public outcry from criminal use of machine guns, SBR's and sawed-off shotguns is what prompted the NFA to begin with.
Nevertheless, as near as I can tell, ATF only approved ONE brace. The one submitted by SB Tactical for approval had the floppy elastomer arm-wrap that made it uncomfortable to shoot from the shoulder and that was clearly stated to be important if the ATF letter. From what I have been able to determine, there are no other designs officially approved by ATF. Determinations, like the 2017 one for that particular SB Tactical brace are done on a case by case basis, so any claims that other braces are ATF-approved are not valid. Other manufacturers could have asked for determinations, but they did not. As you stated, ATF has not given detailed specs on what they would consider compliant, so any company who produced and sold arm braces was foolish to think that it was not a risky venture. They conned their customers if they told them there was no risk. On the other hand, a lot of money was made selling these pistols.
There certainly are people who use the arm braces to shoot their weapon like a pistol. Among those are the handicapped, for whom they were originally designed. I will feel sorry for those people if they lose the opportunity to shoot. On the other hand, many others were betting that they could have a functional SBR without dealing with the NFA. They may well lose that bet.
I personally thought that the arm-braces had a 50/50 chance of staying legal. There was a chance that they would become so ubiquitous that it would be too difficult to try to regulate them. There was also a good chance that they would be used in enough mass killings, shootouts, or robberies that there would be a public outcry for them to be banned. Of course, public outcry from criminal use of machine guns, SBR's and sawed-off shotguns is what prompted the NFA to begin with.