They have the force of law however.ATF opinions are not laws.
They have the force of law however.
They can get you arrested and convicted.
here is another ..
And shoot your dog
As ive said before, im not really into MSRs or these types of guns but if you find somewhere to donate money to fight this, let us know, ill pitch in a couple bills.Honestly I see it as a cash grab.. since Q I guess is/would be responsible for $400 more per unit sold im taxes and what not if the gun was classified as a SBR instead of a pistol.
Also Q being such a small company they have less resources to fight off the ATF/IRS, they would be an easy target
Democrat presidential candidates.And rape your kids.
Oh sorry, thats the UN.
I will say that I’m not so sure about Kevin Brittingham as having limited resources. Previously owned AAC (sold it for $18 million), also received a large payout from Remington, then worked at Sig Sauer, and now owns Q. Kevin has some money! If you ever watch his live feeds on Instagram you can see what looks like a football field sized pool behind his hot tub lol.Nothing.. at first I was thinking they were going after the PDW style arm brace (DD was using the same design maybe different company but same style)
But the sugar weasel uses an SBA3 brace like most every other Pistol .
So honestly sounds like a cash grab for the ATF/IRS as Q is a smaller boutique company with limited resources to fight as hard
I will say that I’m not so sure about Kevin Brittingham as having limited resources. Previously owned AAC (sold it for $18 million), also received a large payout from Remington, then worked at Sig Sauer, and now owns Q. Kevin has some money! If you ever watch his live feeds on Instagram you can see what looks like a football field sized pool behind his hot tub lol.
WH Investigating ATF Decision to Increase Regulation on Certain Pistols
WH Investigating ATF Move to Increase Regulation on Certain Pistols
The White House is investigating the ATF's decision to increase regulation on Q, LLC's (Q) Honey Badger Pistol.www.breitbart.com
There’s nothing strictly aimed at the SBA3 currently. All braces are fine right now. The only thing that the ATF has made a decision on is specifically aimed at the Honey Badger pistol.So do I need to take the SBA3 off my pistol? In a free state, I could add a VFG and make it an "other" as it's over 26".
I do like how Kevin from Q is backing his customers as much as possible. Any owner of their Honey Badger pistol now has an SBR. So to legally own it now (if they’re able to in their state) is to file a Form 1 which includes the cost of the $200 tax stamp. Q will reimburse the owner the $200...so that’s cool. Shouldn’t have to do it since the ATF is crap, but it’s nice that the company will help their customers out.
There’s nothing strictly aimed at the SBA3 currently. All braces are fine right now. The only thing that the ATF has made a decision on is specifically aimed at the Honey Badger pistol.
True. Until they decide that the SBA 3 on the shit weasel makes it an SBR. Also in the ATF letter, they said they were taking the "holistic" approach, taking into consideration magazine capacity, optics, weight, etc.
But they also said they won't be able to rule on the brace itself.
There fore an sba3 may be kosher on pistol a,y, & f. But turn pistols b,q,r, and j into SBRs
They'll know it when they see it
If ATF rules that the Sugar Weasel is an SBR, than the issue is the Sugar Weasel as a whole and not because of its individual parts (depending on how they word their ruling). The issue will then come when all the people with SBA3’s send letters to the ATF asking since the Sugar Weasel is an SBR, does that mean the SBA3 is no longer a legal option for a pistol. People are their own worst enemy and open up themselves to problems. This is exactly what happened when some idiot sent a letter to the ATF for clarification regarding vertical foregrips on pistols with folding adapters.True. Until they decide that the SBA 3 on the shit weasel makes it an SBR. Also in the ATF letter, they said they were taking the "holistic" approach, taking into consideration magazine capacity, optics, weight, etc.
If ATF rules that the Sugar Weasel is an SBR, than the issue is the Sugar Weasel as a whole and not because of its individual parts (depending on how they word their ruling). The issue will then come when all the people with SBA3’s send letters to the ATF asking since the Sugar Weasel is an SBR, does that mean the SBA3 is no longer a legal option for a pistol. People are their own worst enemy and open up themselves to problems. This is exactly what happened when some idiot sent a letter to the ATF for clarification regarding vertical foregrips on pistols with folding adapters.