How could this possibly be legal?

Sure looks like a "class 3" weapon to me.

It's a brace, and is legal.

Why are we our own worst enemies?

MCgunner said:

Well, explain to me HOW it's a brace vs a butt stock by legal definition. Not being an enemy, but I don't understand how this could NOT be a short barreled shotgun. In fact, I really don't get the whole shockwave legality thing, stock or no, very confusing, but, hey, the BATFE has said so and they're the interpreters of the law, not me.

If this thing is actually legal, I might set me up a shock wave with this stock...er....arm brace. I don't care much for any sort of PGO, but a short shotgun with a stock would make for a compact truck gun. I occasionally see hogs on my private road and have a folding stock 16" SKS in the truck for this at the moment. I suppose it's adequate, but there's always a reason for a new weapon.

Click to expand...

Explain to me what exactly is wrong with short barreled shotguns and rifles.

Laws against them shouldn't exist.
This is as good a work around as any

I have the same setup on my Shockwave. It is now a viable weapon instead of a range toy.

I don't ask questions, I accept that since the BATFE has said that it doesn't require a tax/permission stamp that I can use it without requiring payment of the tax or further vetting.

I am not an expert on these things, but since the Shockwave isn't a shotgun (it is a "firearm"), and since you maintain the minimum 26" in this configuration, that you have not created a "short barrel shotgun" by the addition of the brace. It was not a shotgun, and it does not become a shotgun, thus it is not a short barrel shotgun.

The term “Shotgun” means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder, and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shot or a single projectile for each single pull of the trigger.



Your sarcasm doesn’t make it a shotgun.

From what I understand...The hole in the back for your arm to go through plus the Velcro strap to secure it to your arm makes it a brace.

The ATF made a ruling in favor of it. I don't argue wins for us. Like finding $ in a jacket you don't remember putting in the pocket.

How does a shoulder stock on a handgun or a half an inch difference in the length of a shotgun barrel justify felony charges?

It is a good thing to know the law better than those who write it, and those who enforce it.

I like it.

ColtPythonElite said:

I like it.

Click to expand...

It would make a Shockwave slightly less worthless.

It's not a buttstock because it wasn't designed to be fired from the shoulder. The fact that it can be shouldered and fired doesn't change the stated intent of the device.

Fine Figure of a Man said:

How does a shoulder stock on a handgun or a half an inch difference in the length of a shotgun barrel justify felony charges?

Click to expand...

Because that's the law. It's a stupid law, but that's the law. The fact that we don't like the law doesn't make it magically not the law.

Madcap_Magician said:

Because that's the law. It's a stupid law, but that's the law. The fact that we don't like the law doesn't make it magically not the law.

Click to expand...

Yes, I get that.
"Justify" was the key word in my statement.

The ATF said it was a brace no matter how it is used. Why look a gift horse in the mouth?

MCgunner said:

Not a shotgun? What is it, a grenade launcher? It's not black powder and it fires a shot shell. Uh, okay, not a shotgun, fine, I'll load it with black powder from the muzzle like a Howdah and see if it works.

Click to expand...

You're trying to apply logic to a legal issue. Stop it

The legal verbiage of what makes a shotgun was written in 1934 and includes minimum length provisions and design intended to be fired from the shoulder. These definitions were made over 85 years ago, and the last significant revisions were made over 50 years ago. No one was even considering these kind of weapons at that time.

The reason they're not NFA (right now) also relates to the actual statutory definition of a SBS, which includes barrel length of course, but also "a shotgun designed or redesigned to be fired from the shoulder..."

So that brings us to this weapon. It's length is under the statutory length for a title 1 shotgun and it is not designed to be fired from the shoulder. It also started out as a virgin (new) receiver, so it was not previously a shotgun legally. It also does not fit the definition of a pistol. That means it does not fall into any statutory weapon category, so it is legally an "other firearm".

Adding a brace to it is another quirk of law and ATF's regulatory power. They have the ability to decide when something is or is not a "stock" and in the case of a brace, they decided that it would not be seen as a stock*, and that adding it to a weapon does not redesign the weapon to be fired from the shoulder. So legally, you are not adding a stock to a gun or redesigning it to be fired from the shoulder, so you don't run into SBS issues.

These fall into the same area as AR and AK pistols. For all intents and purposes, they are rifles and shotguns, but because of the way our country regulates firearms, they are legally not.

* The ATF HAS previously reversed their opinion on braces, and then reverted back to them being legal. Given enough pressure from the public/congress/the president, I could see them reversing themselves again and having another bumpstock like issue where they are declared contraband by fiat.

MCgunner said:

Weird, just weird. I guess, so long as it's legal that's all that matters. NOW, since it's not a shotgun, I can find me a 590 butt stock to mount on it, I suppose, I mean, it's not a shotgun, right, it's just a firearm? I suppose that'd work fine until I got caught with it if I had to use it in a self defense shooting or something.

Click to expand...

Sure, go ahead and commit a felony. It becomes a SBS if you add a real stock to it. You don't need that $100,000 + lawyer fees, the next 10 years of your life, or any sort of job prospects when you get out.

Practically there is no difference, but LEGALLY there is. Stupid rules, but this is the world we live in.

Fine Figure of a Man said:

Yes, I get that.
"Justify" was the key word in my statement.

Click to expand...

The SBR/SBS inclusion in the NFA doesn't make sense until you look at previous revisions of the bill and items that were not included in the final law. Originally all pistols were included as NFA weapons, so they also wanted to make sure that you couldn't legally take a rifle and make a pistol by cutting down the barrel. Thus the ONLY weapons that would be title 1 would be long guns with barrel lengths above the set minimums (originally 18" for both rifles and shotguns, and then the length for rifles was decreased to 16").

Before the bill could be passed, the restriction on handguns was removed, but everything else was left in place.

Thats why we can have an AR pistol with 11.5" barrel and everything is fine, but put a stock on the same gun (without paying a bribe to the ATF) and you commit a felony.

They repeatedly show people shouldering the arm brace. That’s not legal. They are breaking the law right there.

Telekinesis said:

The SBR/SBS inclusion in the NFA doesn't make sense until you look at previous revisions of the bill and items that were not included in the final law. Originally all pistols were included as NFA weapons, so they also wanted to make sure that you couldn't legally take a rifle and make a pistol by cutting down the barrel. Thus the ONLY weapons that would be title 1 would be long guns with barrel lengths above the set minimums (originally 18" for both rifles and shotguns, and then the length for rifles was decreased to 16").

Before the bill could be passed, the restriction on handguns was removed, but everything else was left in place.

Thats why we can have an AR pistol with 11.5" barrel and everything is fine, but put a stock on the same gun (without paying a bribe to the ATF) and you commit a felony.

Click to expand...

It is a pointless law that makes less sense the more you look at it.

Maybe the OP concern, at least it is my concern, that it may be legal now, but could easily be retracted in the near future and would make a large number of overnight criminals out of a bunch of us. Same goes for pistol AK's and AR's with the "brace" that is realistically a stock.