Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by moe mensale, Oct 7, 2020.
Yeah, methinks they are playing a bit loose on that design.
Look, I know we'd like full repeal of the NFA, but realistically, that won't happen. It doesn't mean don't fight for it, but getting SBRs, suppressors, and sawed off shotguns off should be realistic. With the modern technology, an SBR isn't any more dangerous than the right handgun. Nor is a sawed off shutgun, or suppressor. Frankly machine guns aren't either, they're really only good for suppressive fire, or putting someone down with extreme predjudice. In terms of a mass shooting, a semi auto rifle will always be better as inflicting more casualties. But I recognize that removing machine guns will be very hard to convince people.
Well, that's not an official Q video. They have no control over how an end user or a reviewer uses their product, do they? There are scores of personal videos on the net showing people shouldering their "pistols." Now if they have similar videos on their website then that's a different issue but they don't. Or they may have taken them down when this crap started. I don't know.
Here's something else to consider. Q sells both a Honey Badger pistol (msrp $2,600) and a Honey Badger SBR (msrp $2,500). Add another $100 onto the pistol price and you can get an actual SBR, the cute stamp and avoid all kinds of legal crap. Yeah, I know there's a few reasons for getting the pistol over the SBR. Just pointing out some monetary considerations.
And yet there are several big names (see post #5) dipping their toes into the "braced pistol" pond. What's the chance their high priced attorneys screwed up on this? ATF, once again, is playing loose with their regulatory powers and I think it's all politically motivated.
Caveat - I'm not for or against Q's position here. I find the whole ATF/NFA SBR, SBS, brace issue to be ridiculous. Personally, I opted for the SBR route myself.
I don't think the consideration in monetary at all, I think they designed and marketed exactly what the buyers wanted: a SBR with a collapsible buttstock that functions also an an armbrace because there's a large segment of the firearms community that's not cool with the idea of registering their firearms with the feds. Or live in a state that prohibits SBRs. Or don't like the idea that you need the ATFs permission to cross state lines with a registered SBR.
It was designed by SB arms, and it's almost identical to the ATF approved PDW brace on SIGs MPX and MCX lines.
Do you have a source for this information?
In the first video of post 11 Kevin Brittingham mentions it to Colion, but I have not tried to dig into ATF's website on it. It's worth watching in any case.
Kevin's posts on Q's Instagram. Though after reading the comments again it's a little vague as to whether that's the actual issue or if he was just shutting up the fudds claiming it was.
Silencer shop also put out this video from Kevin.
Just some more info..
The White House is investigating the ATF’s decision to increase regulation on Q, LLC’s (Q) Honey Badger Pistol, and the agency is warning that other AR-15 pistols may be targeted as well.
Brietbart News reported that the ATF sent Q a Cease & Desist letter, dated August 3, 2020, announcing a reclassification of Q’s Honey Badger Pistol as a short barrel rifle (SBR). This means the pistol now falls under the purview of the National Firearms Act (1934), as do machine guns, suppressors, and SBRs.
The ATF letter noted that two other Q pistols–the Sugar Weasel and the Mini Fix–may also fall under NFA purview.
Q responded to the ATF by issuing its own letter, which began:
Q has ceased all production of the Honey Badger Pistol, and submitted a comprehensive letter to ATF and the Department of Justice stating why we disagree with this classification. Additionally, we have provided recommendations on how to address 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 and definite guidance from the ATF.
The Honey Badger, Sugar Weasel, and Mini Fix all have stabilizing braces, and the ATF’s letter caused trepidation among owners of what are estimated to be millions of AR-15 pistols with stabilizing braces.
On Saturday the White House told the Washington Beacon that the administration would be looking into the ATF’s actions in order to ensure Second Amendment rights are not being violated.
The White House said, “The White House and leadership at the Department of Justice are reviewing this matter to ensure there is no interference with the ability of law-abiding citizens—including lawful firearms manufacturers—to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed liberties.”
So Keven (Q) is offering to pay the $200 tax for any Honey Badger pistol owner who decides to Form 1 their gun. That's potentially an $800,000 hit to Q's bank account. That's taking care of your customer base when the rules are arbitrarily changed on you by an unaccountable federal agency staffed with Obama holdovers. Outstanding!
One interesting comment (~2:00) was that the ATF approved another company's pistol that used the same brace that's used on the Honey Badger pistol but not the same brace on the Honey Badger. How arbitrary is that? How does a federal agency that sets industry rules, regulations, interpretations or whatever you want to call them legally function without standardized procedures?
You know, the "bump stock ban" maybe affected ~50,000 end users. Not many in the grand scheme and lots of people could have cared less about bump stocks anyway. Now we're looking at potentially 4,000,000 end users becoming overnight felons. What's next?
Trump needs to shorten the ATF's leash - a lot.
Well, I know President Trump got my email, has he gotten yours?
"On Saturday the White House told the Washington Beacon that the administration would be looking into the ATF’s actions in order to ensure Second Amendment rights are not being violated."
Was there not a weapon sometime back that the atf waived the $200 fee to get legal?
An update from Q
Last Friday, October 9, 2020, our attorneys received a letter from ATF Chief Counsel Joel Roessner “temporarily suspending the Cease and Desist letter” associated with the Honey Badger Pistol by Q®. The letter states that the suspension, “will remain in effect for a period of sixty (60) days . . . unless withdrawn or extended by ATF.” The stated purpose of the suspension is to allow the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) an opportunity, “to further review the applicability of the National Firearms Act to the manufacture and transfer of the model ‘Honey Badger Pistol’ firearm.”
Our attorneys quickly followed up to inquire if the underlying Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division evaluation was also suspended but have not received a response. Regardless, until we are told otherwise by the U.S. government of a permanent decision, we must assume that the suspension of the Cease and Desist letter does not impact the ATF’s position that the Honey Badger Pistol is a National Firearms Act (“NFA”) weapon, as the ATF could arbitrarily withdraw the suspension at any time.
We believe this 60-day suspension is an effort to put manufacturers, distributors, and consumers at ease, and to postpone the issue past the presidential election in hopes that a new administration will take a different view. Using licensees as political pawns is unbecoming of a regulatory agency and ignoring the underlying evaluation in this letter is simply irresponsible. Q will not succumb to this level or irresponsibility. Therefore, without further clarification from ATF on their evaluation, we will not continue manufacturing the Honey Badger Pistol.
Once again, we urge you to continue the pressure and contact the Department of Justice (ATF’s parent agency) by using this Take Action link provided by the National Rifle Association.
Additionally, we encourage you to continue reaching out to the White House and ask President Trump to halt and rollback ATF’s efforts to issue arbitrary and capricious decisions affecting millions of legal gun owners.
White House Comment Line:
(202) 456-1111 / Email
Residents from the following states and districts should reach out to their congressional representatives to let them know what they think of ATF’s actions:
Kentucky - Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) - https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/
(202) 224-2541 / Email
Alabama – Sen. Richard Shelby (R) - Chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations and oversees funding of DOJ/ATF. https://www.shelby.senate.gov/public/
(202) 224-5744 / Email
Kansas – Sen. Jerry Moran (R) – Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) which is responsible for funding the ATF.
(202) 224-6521 / Email
South Carolina – Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) – Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is responsible for ATF oversight.
(202) 224-5972 / Email
Ohio 4th District - Congressman Jim Jordan (R) – Ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee which has jurisdiction over 2nd amendment issues. https://jordan.house.gov/
(202) 225-2676 / Email
If you’re not from one these States, you can find your representative’s contact information here: https://www.contactingcongress.org/
We sincerely thank everyone for their support in this situation. We, in conjunction with SB Tactical®, the NRA®, and other industry partners soon to be announced, will continue to do everything in our power to resolve this matter amicably for all parties involved.