Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Whiny posers who want to look bad and get away with it. And this is why we have Moms Against Gun groups saying "we can't tell who is a good guy, so we want them all to be banned."
Good job at selling responsible gun ownership, dudes. You bought a prosthetic adapter for one armed veterans and use it as a rifle because you won't try harder to be more accurate, and all the while basking in the admiration of your buddies who elevated you in their esteem?
You got problems and you made things worse for yourself. Too bad.
Good lord. So much projection in this. Kind of like the "bubbas and neckbeards" comments from others.
IF the ATF had continued to allow it, using the SIG brace to get around the NFA was a fine idea. It really works pretty well, and delivers a lot of control. (laughable comments that since Jerry Miculek once shot a target at 400 meters with a pistol, I don't need a stock, notwithstanding.) For the period where this device was considered legal for that use, it was a good compromise.
I know a lady who is wheel-chair bound and was building a short-barreled AR "pistol" for home defense purposes, and bought the SIG brace to allow her to shoulder the weapon. Several of very knowledgeable and highly-trained shooters in my circle advised her on that and it was just about exactly what she most needed for her purpose.
Now she can't do that, and will have to either file with the BATFE, which is way more hassle than this non-gun nut enthusiast lady is going to get into, or deal with the fact that she's got a heavy, semi-useless range toy instead of a capable short carbine/PDW.
(Or rebuild it into a 16" carbine which is ungainly for her in her chair and household.)
We don't need all the denigration of our fellow shooters who were early adopters of this idea. It is just wrong, and childish, and further divides us.
Last edited: