NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Laws and Legislation => Topic started by: Jito463 on October 06, 2020, 09:48:52 PM
-
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/atf-rules-qs-honey-badge-is-a-short-barrel-rifle-issues-cease-and-desist-letter/
While this technically isn't a law, it is a legal matter. I've never heard of this company, but one called 'Q' produces an AR style pistol called the Honey Badger. Frankly, not something I'd run out to get, but for anyone that has one, you need to take proactive steps to ensure you don't accidentally become a felon from buying a once legal item.
Dear Customer:
On August 3rd, 2020, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) issued Q® a formal Cease & Desist letter, notifying us that ATF has taken the position that the Q Honey Badger Pistol is a short-barreled rifle (“SBR”) regulated under the National Firearms Act (“NFA”). In response, Q has ceased all production of the Honey Badger Pistol, and submitted a comprehensive letter to ATF and the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) stating why we disagree with this classification[1]. Additionally, we have provided recommendations on how to address the firearms already in circulation. Q is seeking solutions that best protect you, the individual, and Q’s distribution network from falling out of compliance with ATF regulations, and federal law. At this time, Q has not received any definitive guidance from the ATF.
In the meantime, Q encourages possessors of the Honey Badger Pistol to take these proactive measures until a resolution is reached between Q and ATF.
1. Complete one of the following:
A: Remove the barreled upper receiver from the lower receiver and dedicate it as a replacement
for another AR-style pistol or registered short-barreled rifle; or
B: If you do not possess another AR-style pistol or registered short-barreled rifle, remove the barreled upper receiver from the lower receiver and temporarily transfer it out of your possession by, for example, transferring it to the dominion and control of another individual; and
2. Once the previous step is completed, you may file an ATF Form 1 to register the lower receiver as a short-barreled rifle. Upon Form 1 approval, the firearm may be reassembled.
Failure to complete option a or option b could result in prosecution and is subject to a $10,000.00 fine and up to 10 years imprisonment.
I have highlighted the bottom line, as it's the most critical. Since it's now classified as an SBR, you must go through the NFA tax stamp process to make it legal. I also found a video on the subject, if you prefer that over reading.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yImHkoiqmk
*EDIT*
A comment below the article in the top link, seems to have an interesting summary of the issue. If true, this could be fairly easy to resolve (on the manufacturer's end).
I think it’s because it’s under 26 in. with the brace fully extended in a position that can be shouldered and fired.
If you have a 7.5 in. AR pistol upper with a SBA-3 and a Law Tactical folder, the pistol is concealable but cannot be fired with the stock folded.
With the stock unfolded and extended, it is now shoulderable but it is over 26 in. long (i.e. – not an SBR).
-
I took a look at the letter that was sent to theme and the issue is not overall length, it is the belief of the ATF that the firearm is intended to be fired from the shoulder.
This may be the start of another reversal on pistol braces by the ATF.
John K
-
I took a look at the letter that was sent to theme and the issue is not overall length, it is the belief of the ATF that the firearm is intended to be fired from the shoulder.
This may be the start of another reversal on pistol braces by the ATF.
John K
From what I gathered, it's because it can be shouldered and fired WHILE being under 26" in length. If it were under 26", but could not be shouldered and fired (such as those with a fold up brace), then it would still be legal. Because it can be shouldered and fired while under the regulated length, that's what makes it an SBR. Again, that's just my understanding of the matter.
-
I want to know WHO wrote this letter?
I see people online blaming republicans. I really dont see Trump saying to do this 4 weeks before the election,
I think some lower level Trump hater did this to try and mess with the election,
-
Truth is no one knows why this was done and ATF won't disclose its reasons.
There is a rumor about length of pull exceeding 13.5" but the actual spec is 13.3"
ATF s makes some nebulous statement about the firearm being "holistically" too similar to an SBR. Not sure how a company can respond to that.
There remain many other AR15 pistols manufacturers with models using this same brace on the market with no mention from ATF as to their status.
Standby for the law suits which will drag on until the next election in 2024
-
Colion Noir has released a couple videos on the matter, including an interview with the creator of the Honey Badger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuNvgFfrcAI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJEHb5H37Do
-
Guess I'll sit back and wait and see, still not sure why ATF is interpreting law, they are enforcement only. Looks like high level folks at ATF are making moves since they think there will a change with the election. Link enclosed. https://www.ammoland.com/2020/10/rogue-atf-heads-targets-the-honey-badger-before-the-election/#axzz6aVk0kMqS If this stands, there will be many overnight felons.
-
The maker Q did announce they would reimburse those who bought their "Pistol" for the tax stamp needed with documentation. Maybe they figured into their business model since it cost $3100. Still a nice gesture. I believe SB tactical owns Q.
-
Q is founded by Kevin Brittingham, who founded Advanced Armament Corporation, he sold that to Remington, he went to work for Sig and got them up and running on silencer platform, then left Sid and formed Q as in James Bond Q being the R+D department and supplier of 007 weapons.
Now Remington is in bankruptcy and divisions being sold off, AAC is ending up in some conglomerate called. JJE Capital Holdings LLC for the DPMS, H&R, Stormlake, AAC and Parker brands;
-
https://scontent-dfw5-2.cdninstagram.com/v/t51.2885-15/e35/121323112_990002731514240_7751575452977729280_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.cdninstagram.com&_nc_cat=108&_nc_ohc=8G6o7MlMO-sAX9EkWk1&_nc_tp=18&oh=54ef600cd6e229514f4d8eb1f35b4452&oe=5FB18E27&fbclid=IwAR3bV1GCmv4Pfar03P7LNoPzpNwbzkgNYTNY52Qdj6epr8CU_tD0WBdVjIA
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gj-0-q7VZmk
Premiered Dec 16, 2020
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZAsrxjSSVg
-
The ATF has published a letter with "clarifications" for what in there determination makes an AR type braced pistol an SBR requiring registration under the NFA. However there are no clear metrics that someone could adhere to and avoid running afoul of the ATF, only vague statements presumably to frighten braced pistol owners into registering them with the ATF or dismantling/destroying them.
The ATF is allowing a 2 week comment period and I would encourage everyone to respond and to ask friends and
family to do the same.
I would also recommend writing or calling our Federal Representatives and ask them to rein in the ATF.
https://www.ammoland.com/2020/12/atf-to-publish-factors-for-classifying-guns-with-stabilizing-braces/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=3c40002920-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-3c40002920-20750737
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/18/2020-27857/objective-factors-for-classifying-weapons-with-stabilizing-braces
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=ATF-2020-0001-0001
Edited to add links.
-
Ive been reading a lot on this, and watching some videos, no one has any Idea I dont think. they are all different
BUT my question is,
if you submit for a stamp.
1 do you get a free $5 Any other weapon stamp? where you have to keep a brace and never shoulder it?
2 or do you get a free $200 SBR stamp? where you can stick any stock you want on it.
-
Guidance casting legal doubt on braces, withdrawn. https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/sbcriteria_withdraw.not_.final_draft.12-23-20_with_typed_signature.pdf Just kicking the can down the road, especially with a sympathetic administration coming in and a possible upset in the Senate on Jan 5. This isn't near over.
-
Yeah, they'll be back, amyd probably trying to screw us even worse when they have air cover from the Harris administration.
-
Guidance casting legal doubt on braces, withdrawn. https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/sbcriteria_withdraw.not_.final_draft.12-23-20_with_typed_signature.pdf Just kicking the can down the road, especially with a sympathetic administration coming in and a possible upset in the Senate on Jan 5. This isn't near over.
Nope, not actually pulled after all. And even if it still will be pulled, there's talk that because the letter was posted, the DOJ still has to make a ruling on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3E5Fdt-XD8
-
When I posted the link, that was an accurate statement, although it obviously changed.
-
When I posted the link, that was an accurate statement, although it obviously changed.
I know, that wasn't intended as criticism, just as an update and correction.
-
I just took a look, and while the notice is still up, the withdrawal notice is linked to it. Also it dose not appear that they are still taking comments as the electronic means is closed and the only way to submit them would be by mail or fax.
Having said that, I fully expect that this is only a temporary reprieve and the only reason they withdrew it was they were surprised anyone noticed it and at the response they got.
John K
-
I just bought an AR pistol that has a brace so I have to assume that it's legal?
-
right now. no one has any idea what they are doing,
I think ATF pulled that, to wait for biteme to get into office,