allen-1
NES Member
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Q Honey Badger Pistol is an SBR... Your Brace is Next!
- Thread starter connor
- Start date
JRT
NES Member
I own an SBR Honey Badger, while that does look like a cheek weld that’s not where my cheek falls, not even close.
JRT
NES Member
Nobody is questioning the legality of a pistol.
allen-1
NES Member
I agree with your first statement, entirely.
It's pertinent because it doesn't exist on paper.
It can disappear.
Whiskeywon
NES Member
Hey! That's just an adjustment feature for people of various sizes and lengths of arm. Can't discriminate against children now can we?
Maybe it's the extension feature?. The fed rules on this shit just need to go away forever. This flip flopping is getting old.
In all seriousness trying to rationalize this in any meaningful way is a fruitless effort. Let's be honest, basically any company that has an oversized pistol they are marketing has done exactly what he's done.
ReluctantDecoy
NES Member
That's the only thing I can think of that separates this from any of the millions of other designs in my mind. Although, most people who have reviewed this have pointed out that this cheek weld cover is too close to the charging handle to be comfortably used, as you want to be a little further back with your head, so this is a really weak call out by the ATF if this is indeed the case. But on the other end, I suppose Q could have chosen to not point out the ATF's inability to make a solid call by having a rather useless design feature just for the looks.
allen-1
NES Member
SBRs can't be transported across state lines without notifying the ATF beforehand.
Pistols can be taken into any state that you legally possess that pistol.
One of my AR pistols pretty much lives in my truck.
I can take my AR pistols into SC and FL just as I would take any other pistol.
I remove it before I go up north, because CT bans un-registered "assault weapons" including "assault pistols".
Again, it can disappear if it's serialized too and since you put it together yourself nobody knows it has a brace on it, how it is configured etc etc.
Even if ATF goes and searches FFL's to determine who had 28 lowers in their possession, it doesn't mean they are configured illegally.
If ATF comes knocking with a warrant and you don't have the serialized lowers you bought, there is nothing illegal about that. If they find an actual unregistered SBR you are in trouble no matter what.
Impertinent here.
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,268
- Likes
- 33,195
No. It's not. (They dismissive tone that Tucker took was far funnier than her answer.)
Me too. I had. . . maybe still have. . . a pre-ban AR with one of those triangular-shaped adjustable stocks. My face is always half on/off the thing anyhow. I also had that huge monolithic megabeast of adjustable stock that Magpul or someone put out. You could hammer nails with it. The cheek rail ran teh entire length so you always had a good weld. But it had to weigh over a lb by itself.
But my point is that, for a gun that is DESIGNED AS A PISTOL, putting something to get a cheek weld is probably flying in the face of the ATF's previous decisions. Sometimes you're better off not poking the bear. . . unless you are well prepared to go the distance in court.
Yep that and if you don't own any NFA stuff you may not want to cross that line and become a highly regulated registered gun owner.
Once you own any NFA stuff I think generally I would SBR instead of building a pistol, except for maybe a truck gun in your situation. I live in NH on the MA line and routinely drive through MA to go between places in NH, just is how the roads run, so I can't even practicality carry without dilligently thinking about my plans for the day.
JRT
NES Member
I think the funny thing here is you could list Mass as a destination for your SBR with the ATF. That AR pistol though would get you all jammed up. The laws are comical.
What "line" ?
Lol a dude with a stamp is no more "highly regulated" than anyone else, there are thousands of people with stamps. If you've ever obtained a license anywhere, or had one of your 4473s go to the out of business dealer repository, you're just as "marked" and the cherry is popped and not worth worrying about because you can't un-ring that bell or put the toothpaste back into the
tube.
ETA: with the explosion of SBRs and suppressors nationally over the past decade or so, I would not be surprised if the real number is "the better part of a million" people. Cans and things like that in free america are no longer "super rare" or weird.
I guess but to me there is a huge difference between a piece of paper sitting in a folder in a cabinet at an FFL, for a gun that I am not legally required to document possession of and can legally loan/sell/lose/dispose of without notifying anyone, versus being in a computer somewhere with a list of what I own with stipulations around who/how/where it's possessed.
In NH where we have no de-facto registery, often not even a permit, owning NFA (and the process/records/stipulations) is a huge leap from just owning guns.
allen-1
NES Member
Same in Georgia.
I keep going back and forth about getting a suppressor(s ?) for my AR(s ?) because of the paperwork.
Why would it? A free man one day... and a felon the next. 3 letter agency’s wet dream.
Maybe it's the extension feature?. The fed rules on this shit just need to go away forever. This flip flopping is getting old.
View: https://youtu.be/L5dT3r_oHoo
Shockwave the 12GA or the "shockwave brace"?
The shotgun-ammo-consuming Mossberg Shockwave was never a pistol under federal law, it was always "Firearm" and still is; however it is a pistol for the purposes of New Hampshire and Massachusetts laws.
Yep I think for someone used to free state gun ownership NFA is much more of a leap. In some states just owning any gun requires fingerprints, we aren't conditioned to that shit.
Now I will say, same as you, if I went down the path, it would be a bunch of cans and SBR's.
JRT
NES Member
I respect anybody trying to limit their exposure. I truly believe the government has what they want on you, and if you ever find yourself in their sights they will get what they want. Suppressors add a level of enjoyment to firearms I would’t want to pass on.
Last edited:
Asaltweapon
NES Member
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,268
- Likes
- 33,195
If I left mASS, I'd have to have a few. . . several thousand sitting ready for purchase. A few cans. A Galil ACE pistol. I'm sure some other fun AR thingies. Hell, I'd even gladly overpay for ammo I don't have at that point. Gosh it would be fun.
But no plans to do any of that. So
for me for now. Probably forever. But maybe not. Maybe in 2021 the USSC overturns pretty much everything back to 1968.
But no plans to do any of that. So
for me for now. Probably forever. But maybe not. Maybe in 2021 the USSC overturns pretty much everything back to 1968.Lol keep deluding yourself that you're not on a list.
Have ever had an LTC or CCW? (anywhere) List.
Ever had an MHP form done on you? List.
Ever bought a gun from a dealer that went out of business? List.
Are you 100% sure BG checks never stored? List.
Same with ATF auditing dealer records. (Although they usually don't copy shit... yet. ) Maybe list.
Even on the first three alone probably 60% of the people on NES would readily fail all 3 tests.
Now, If you told me that you grew up in a cave in vermont and that you made all your firearms out of pounding metal over a boulder plus some random stuff that you picked up in cash from a gun show then I would kind of believe wanting to limit exposure, type paranoia otherwise basically you're just wasting time, thinking about avoiding being a record in relational fusion center databases that you will never be able to avoid...
Now maybe if some laws were passed about 20 years ago to protect people's privacy, we would be having a different conversation, but the government is already doing this shit as I write this post and if you think they're not then I have a nice bridge to sell you. Within the current reality, worrying about exposure getting a stamp is silly.
Never have had a firearm license of any type anywhere.
Don't know what an MHP is but I'm fairly sure that's a no.
As far as what goes on with a 4473 or if .gov has stored some, sure, maybe.
But there is a huge difference between an AR carbine & an SBR version, and its not the 4 inches of barrel.
One of them I may have bought 8 years ago but also may have gotten rid of in any way I choose. One of them I am required to maintain possession of unless its turned over to an FFL or reported as stolen, destroyed, etc.
One of them requires a form, the other a form, fingerprints, $200, and a long wait.
There is definitely a difference. I think folks who are used to dealing with gaining say an LTC in MA might tolerate the idea more easily, to me its a huge difference.
