Q Honey Badger Pistol is an SBR... Your Brace is Next!

Last edited:
HB-PISTOL-RIGHT-CLOSED-768x240.jpg


Hmm... Looks a bit like your typical pistol brace, though does that rear portion of the brace come off if one pushes the button? Makes it too easy to install a regular butt stock? Tough to figure out why in the world it was classified SBR.

Or perhaps someone at the ATF was miffed over the $2600 price tag?
 
HB-PISTOL-RIGHT-CLOSED-768x240.jpg


Hmm... Looks a bit like your typical pistol brace, though does that rear portion of the brace come off if one pushes the button? Makes it too easy to install a regular butt stock? Tough to figure out why in the world it was classified SBR.

Or perhaps someone at the ATF was miffed over the $2600 price tag?
Grabbers gonna Grab bro, who cares why.
That button extends the brace. makes it fit better.
 
HB-PISTOL-RIGHT-CLOSED-768x240.jpg


Hmm... Looks a bit like your typical pistol brace, though does that rear portion of the brace come off if one pushes the button? Makes it too easy to install a regular butt stock? Tough to figure out why in the world it was classified SBR.

Or perhaps someone at the ATF was miffed over the $2600 price tag?

The standard SBA3 brace just uses a regular carbine tube and slides on and off just like any standard stock.
 
If the ATF can change their minds on the classification and therefore legality of something, on a whim, that makes their decision blatantly unconstitutional and unlawful. That is the definition of arbitrary. Other than abolishing the NFA and the ATF entirely, the courts ought to rule the ATF ruling void for vagueness, and the NFA unconstitutional as applied to all pistol brace firearms. Same goes for bump stocks, in which the (lack of) logic is significantly worse even.
 
So is this the magic 13.5" LOP? SB is well aware of the mythical 13.5 felony and stays short of it.

Letter suggests the determination was based on the advertising material on Q's website, or perhaps something else that makes this "proprietary Pistol Stabilizing Brace®, made for Q® by our friends at SB Tactical™. " different from all the other brace products SB Tactical sells, or maybe it's just BATFE being BATFE.
 
This is terrible.

So, from now on you have to register a SBR for a similar configuration?
 
This is terrible.
So, from now on you have to register a SBR for a similar configuration?
ATF determination letters only apply to the specific configuration of a firearm as submitted (they no longer write letters for accessories submitted alone). This letter is particularly egregious because it doesn't really set out what makes that particular "proprietary" arm brace a stock.

TL,DR: Q, LLC and their customers are screwed, but the rest of us aren't screwed... yet.
 
This is terrible.

So, from now on you have to register a SBR for a similar configuration?

Lol, but no. They had a hair up their ass.

Probably because there is no approval letter for that brace/pistol.

The ATF tends to get hemmrhoid flare ups when someone "gets cute" with something like that. Same thing happened to the Aikins accelerator.

The worst this does possibly is threaten the viability of those weird expensive collapsible braces. Maybe Kevin_NH is onto something with the LOP, too.

Gotta love it though when ATF shits on something without being specific. But that is typical.

ETA: I honestly think they only allowed braces to begin with to forestall a federal lawsuit being filed over the excessive form 1 processing time.... legalizing braces back then bought them a reprieve. (this is going way back, when e-file was way shittier than it is now. )
 
Reading the letter it seems to be 100% government speak, no mention of what the actual problem when there are 100's of similar production guns classified differently.

Where did someone pick up on the 13.5 LOP ? That would violate ATF's previous clarifications..

Also, so would advertising such a weapon as being shoulder fired or using a pistol brace of some "unapproved" design that they determine to be a stock.
 
Wow, that looks identical to my Sig MCX pistol
Was shooting in Utah last week, some kid came up to me and said "dont let the sheriff see you putting that brace on your shoulder "
He says once the brace touches your shoulder it's now an SBR...........
 
Lol, but no. They had a hair up their ass.

Probably because there is no approval letter for that brace/pistol.

The ATF tends to get hemmrhoid flare ups when someone "gets cute" with something like that. Same thing happened to the Aikins accelerator.

The worst this does possibly is threaten the viability of those weird expensive collapsible braces. Maybe Kevin_NH is onto something with the LOP, too.

Gotta love it though when ATF shits on something without being specific.

Typing at the same time, ya that's where I went too.
 
BTW in the ATF hogwash they have stated adding a pistol brace (to what is a pistol) intending to use it as a stock constitutes building an SBR. So there is this odd non-actionable concept of what the builder was thinking at the time.

If they advertised how well it shoulders, pushed the limits and flaunted that it was to be used as a rifle, ATF could cite previous guidance stating the gun was actually designed around skirting NFA laws and therefore is an SBR.
 

Today the ATF issued a cease and desist to Q for selling the honey badger pistol, saying it's actually an SBR. This opens up quite a lot of questions as to what else the ATF is going to reclassify, especially considering matt goetz's unreturned letter.
No. The letter was issued 3 August. In the first line: "On 3 August 2020, the ATF issued Q a formal Cease and Desist letter..."

They've had this in hand for over 2 months.
 
Back
Top Bottom