[QUOTE=download;46944692]If you want 40cal you might as well go a step higher and get 10mm.[/QUOTE]
That makes no sense at all.
[QUOTE=zombini;46946534]I'm looking into putting a bipod on my AR, any suggestions? I want to keep it under $80. I looked into grip pods, but they seem to be shitty compared to a decent bipod.[/QUOTE]
Get a Harris bipod from brownells, should run you less than $80. Just go to harris's site and find out what adapter you need if you have rails or standard handguards.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;46946814]That makes no sense at all.[/QUOTE]
More stopping power.
So, earning y'all, the ATF reversed their decision on Sig braces and announced shouldering does make them an SBR.
Personally, I'm absolutely zero surprised by that decision with such an explosion of interest in it suddenly.
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;46948326]More stopping power.[/QUOTE]
no shit but theres a huge difference between the rounds and the guns that fire them. It's like saying instead of getting a Ruger Mark III, you should just get a AR pistol in 5.56. Same diameter afterall....
[editline]17th January 2015[/editline]
[quote]OPEN LETTER ON THE REDESIGN OF “STABILIZING BRACES”
The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public concerning the proper use of devices recently marketed as “stabilizing braces.” These devices are described as “a shooter’s aid that is designed to improve the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped pistols.” The device claims to enhance accuracy and reduce felt recoil when using an AR-style pistol.
These items are intended to improve accuracy by using the operator’s forearm to provide stable support for the AR-type pistol. ATF has previously determined that attaching the brace to a firearm does not alter the classification of the firearm or subject the firearm to National Firearms Act (NFA) control. However, this classification is based upon the use of the device as designed. When the device is redesigned for use as a shoulder stock on a handgun with a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length, the firearm is properly classified as a firearm under the NFA.
The NFA, 26 USCS § 5845, defines “firearm,” in relevant part, as “a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length” and “a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.” That section defines both “rifle” and “shotgun” as “a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder….” (Emphasis added).
Pursuant to the plain language of the statute, ATF and its predecessor agency have long held that a pistol with a barrel less than 16 inches in length and an attached shoulder stock is a NFA “firearm.” For example, inRevenue Ruling 61-45, Luger and Mauser pistols “having a barrel of less than 16 inches in length with an attachable shoulder stock affixed” were each classified as a “short barrel rifle…within the purview of the National Firearms Act.”
In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF considered the objective design of the item as well as the stated purpose of the item. In submitting this device for classification, the designer noted that
The intent of the buffer tube forearm brace is to facilitate one handed firing of the AR15 pistol for those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap. It also performs the function of sufficiently padding the buffer tube in order to reduce bruising to the forearm while firing with one hand. Sliding and securing the brace onto ones forearm and latching the Velcro straps, distributes the weight of the weapon evenly and assures a snug fit. Therefore, it is no longer necessary to dangerously “muscle” this large pistol during the one handed aiming process, and recoil is dispersed significantly, resulting in more accurate shooting without compromising safety or comfort.
In the classification letter of November 26, 2012, ATF noted that a “shooter would insert his or her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol’s handgrip-then tighten the Velcro straps for additional support and retention. Thus configured, the device provides the shooter with additional support of a firearm while it is still held and operated with one hand.” When strapped to the wrist and used as designed, it is clear the device does not allow the firearm to be fired from the shoulder. Therefore, ATF concluded that, pursuant to the information provided, “the device is not designed or intended to fire a weapon from the shoulder.” In making the classification ATF determined that the objective design characteristics of the stabilizing brace supported the stated intent.
ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm. However, ATF has received numerous inquiries regarding alternate uses for this device, including use as a shoulder stock. Because the NFA defines both rifle and shotgun to include any “weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” any person who redesigns a stabilizing brace for use as a shoulder stock makes a NFA firearm when attached to a pistol with a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a handgun with a smooth bore under 18 inches in length.
The GCA does not define the term “redesign” and therefore ATF applies the common meaning. “Redesign” is defined as “to alter the appearance or function of.” See e.g. Webster’s II New College Dictionary, Third Ed. (2005). This is not a novel interpretation. For example ATF has previously advised that an individual possesses a destructive device when possessing anti-personnel ammunition with an otherwise unregulated 37/38mm flare launcher. See ATF Ruling 95-3. Further, ATF has advised that even use of an unregulated flare and flare launcher as a weapon results in the making of a NFA weapon. Similarly, ATF has advised that, although otherwise unregulated, the use of certain nail guns as weapons may result in classification as an “any other weapon.”
[b]The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.
Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol (having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18 inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA.[/b]
If you have any questions about the issues addressed in this letter, you may contact the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division at [email]fire_tech@atf.gov[/email] or by phone at (304) 616-4300.[/quote]
tl;dr NFA says that any firearm with a barrel of under 16 inches [i]redesigned[/i] to fire from the shoulder is a NFA firearm. By shouldering a firearm with the sigbrace with a barrel of under 16 inches, you are redesigning the firearm into a NFA weapon.
tl;dr2: shoestring all over again.
Sure as shit glad I didn't buy into the fad.
I'm trying to decide between: AMD-65, Yugo M92 Pistol, or a Glock 17
I will be eventually getting them all, but I am trying to decide which I want first.
What would be best? I can't decide :/
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;46950284]no shit but theres a huge difference between the rounds and the guns that fire them. It's like saying instead of getting a Ruger Mark III, you should just get a AR pistol in 5.56. Same diameter afterall....
[editline]17th January 2015[/editline]
tl;dr NFA says that any firearm with a barrel of under 16 inches [i]redesigned[/i] to fire from the shoulder is a NFA firearm. By shouldering a firearm with the sigbrace with a barrel of under 16 inches, you are redesigning the firearm into a NFA weapon.
tl;dr2: shoestring all over again.
Sure as shit glad I didn't buy into the fad.[/QUOTE]
I knew from the second I saw MAC's video about it it would blow up with popularity and then the ATF would decide 'fuck yo couch!'.
I was right, for once. Holy shit.
[QUOTE=Cinnamonbun;46950341]I'm trying to decide between: AMD-65, Yugo M92 Pistol, or a Glock 17
I will be eventually getting them all, but I am trying to decide which I want first.
What would be best? I can't decide :/[/QUOTE]
What do you already own? Do you have a reliable handgun yet? If not, get the glack. If you do, do you plan to SBR to the yugo? If the answer is no to both of those, get the AMD.
[quote=ultra_bright]More stopping power.[/quote]
10mm is neat and all, and I had actually considered getting a Glock 20 as a hunting sidearm, but I don't see much use for it outside of that. I guess a Glock 29 would make a nice CC weapon with full power loads, but there are better alternatives in my opinion.
[quote=mastoner20]I knew from the second I saw MAC's video about it it would blow up with popularity and then the ATF would decide 'fuck yo couch!'.
I was right, for once. Holy shit.[/quote]
Once the original letter was sent out, people should have just quit asking questions / making a big deal out of it. MAC's video was kind of stupid; seeing someone on camera using a registered pistol like a rifle, of course that's going to rustle the ATF, even though they said it was okay. I mean, it IS the ATF.
kinda a moot point though, how is anyone ever gonna prove you fired your SIG braced pistol from the shoulder unless the ATF physically witnesses you doing, or you are dumb enough to record a video of yourself doing it.
[QUOTE=felix the cat;46950894]kinda a moot point though, how is anyone ever gonna prove you fired your SIG braced pistol from the shoulder unless the ATF physically witnesses you doing, or you are dumb enough to record a video of yourself doing it.[/QUOTE]
Same thing could be said for 922r or swapping uppers on an AR pistol and rifle. You could also get an ass hole RO.
[QUOTE=MAC21500;46944624]well, you could have anything from an AK or AR pistol to a full size duty gun.
Whatever you choose, make sure you have a plan as to how to get to it and use it, whatever the situation.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83BJIEzBYvM&feature=youtu.be[/media]
[editline]16th January 2015[/editline]
Honestly, I wish everyone would stop pushing the 1986 kool-aid of .40 cal
[B]There is no reason to use .40 nowadays when 9mm bullet technology has far surpassed its 1986 levels.
9mm gets you higher capacity and is more controllable than .40 or .45 which means you get your muzzle back on target faster.[/B]
I love .45 ACP, and it's my choice to carry it, but I recognize it's limitations in todays world with other, better currently existing solutions.
That being said, .40 cal guns and ammo are going to be pretty cheap from trade-ins because a large number of LE departments, not to mention the FBI, are switching back to 9mm.
Kind of tells you something when the agency that initiated ballistics testing that created two new purpose driven calibers switches back to what they were using before.[/QUOTE]
You're HALF right. 9mm is a LOT better than it used to be, however, 40 is the next cartridge that will get new improved projectiles like the 9mm has now.
That means, once they are released, 40 will once again be more powerful.
It doesn't matter how you compare a 9 to a 40, the 40 supports a bigger, heaver bullet, at faster velocities. [b]ALL FACTORS BEING EQUAL, like bullet design and hollowpoint effectiveness, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a 9mm to EVER out perform a 40, simply by mechanical design and the 9mm cartridge's limitations.[/b]
I'm a little concerned about the ATF's stance on reproduction shoulder stocks for C96s; I'm seeing varying letters from them so I'm probably just going to write to them and keep a copy of the response if they OK it in my case.
The one with this gun is a Chinese copy and is the only non-original/non-matching part involved in the sale, but I would really like to use it.
[QUOTE=Camwi_003;46951159]You're HALF right. 9mm is a LOT better than it used to be, however, 40 is the next cartridge that will get new improved projectiles like the 9mm has now.
That means, once they are released, 40 will once again be more powerful.
It doesn't matter how you compare a 9 to a 40, the 40 supports a bigger, heaver bullet, at faster velocities. [b]ALL FACTORS BEING EQUAL, like bullet design and hollowpoint effectiveness, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a 9mm to EVER out perform a 40, simply by mechanical design and the 9mm cartridge's limitations.[/b][/QUOTE]
My only concern with .40cal is that it's apparently very susceptible to overpressure problems due to bullet setback
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;46951296]I'm a little concerned about the ATF's stance on reproduction shoulder stocks for C96s; I'm seeing varying letters from them so I'm probably just going to write to them and keep a copy of the response if they OK it in my case.
The one with this gun is a Chinese copy and is the only non-original/non-matching part involved in the sale, but I would really like to use it.[/QUOTE]
According to the ATF's new definition and their pre- existing definition of a handgun (designed to be fired with one hand) you are "re designing" your handgun if you shoot it with two hands.
This is also confusing considering the ATF stated that shouldering AR pistol buffer tubes is ok.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;46951296]I'm a little concerned about the ATF's stance on reproduction shoulder stocks for C96s; I'm seeing varying letters from them so I'm probably just going to write to them and keep a copy of the response if they OK it in my case.
The one with this gun is a Chinese copy and is the only non-original/non-matching part involved in the sale, but I would really like to use it.[/QUOTE]
They made an exception for the pistols made from WWII and older, mostly because collectors raised hell about it when the NFA was created. For weapons from WWII and before, if a stock was designed for the pistol, it can be used. No other weapons get this exemption.
So you can buy the C96 with a stock without needing a stamp or registering it on a federal level assuming it is only semi auto. Now if it was full auto on the other hand, you would have to fill out all the paper work and pay the tax.
[QUOTE=Camwi_003;46951159]You're HALF right. 9mm is a LOT better than it used to be, however, 40 is the next cartridge that will get new improved projectiles like the 9mm has now.
That means, once they are released, 40 will once again be more powerful.
It doesn't matter how you compare a 9 to a 40, the 40 supports a bigger, heaver bullet, at faster velocities. [b]ALL FACTORS BEING EQUAL, like bullet design and hollowpoint effectiveness, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a 9mm to EVER out perform a 40, simply by mechanical design and the 9mm cartridge's limitations.[/b][/QUOTE]
Bullet size doesn't matter, shot placement does.
Whether you inflict a fatal wound with a 9mm, .40, or .45, it doesn't matter if it isn't to the cranio-ocular cavity, because they won't bleed out any faster based on bullet diameter, and it could still take them 15-30 seconds to die. Until then, they are still in the fight trying to shoot you; your best option would be to shoot back and put as many holes in them as possible to ensure they bleed out in a timely manner.
Quantity has a quality all it's own.
That being said, handgun ammunition in general is anemic compared to rifle ammunition, and should never be expected to be a one hit wonder, as so many continue to believe about the .45 acp.
As far as I'm aware Curio & Relic handguns are exempt from the "shoulder stock = SBR" rule provided the stock and gun originally went together (i.e. not something bubba made in his garage last week for his cool nazi luger)
[editline]17th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=MAC21500;46951475]Bullet size doesn't matter, shot placement does.
Whether you inflict a fatal wound with a 9mm, .40, or .45, it doesn't matter if it isn't to the cranio-ocular cavity, because they won't bleed out any faster based on bullet diameter, and it could still take them 15-30 seconds to die. Until then, they are still in the fight trying to shoot you; your best option would be to shoot back and put as many holes in them as possible to ensure they bleed out in a timely manner.
Quantity has a quality all it's own.
That being said, handgun ammunition in general is anemic compared to rifle ammunition, and should never be expected to be a one hit wonder, as so many continue to believe about the .45 acp.[/QUOTE]
I have a friend who is an ER trauma surgeon, and according to him most handgun wounds are pretty repairable, even hollowpoints.
So uhh dunno if you guys have heard, Magpul's releasing a 60 round AR-15 drum magazine and Glaaawk 17 pmags.
[url]http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/no-arent-dreaming-magpul-releases-glock-pmag/[/url]
[url]http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/magpul-pmag-d60-60-round-drum-magazine/[/url]
Got a new channel you guys might be interested in: [url=http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfctRLXLbhoTIevEVrpsdIQ]The Ammo Channel[/url]
Guy is doing tons of gun builds, and posts videos describing everything he is doing and the like. Right now he is rebuilding a destroyed KGKT. He also has done videos in the past talking about gun-myths and discussing the ability to reload bullets after SHTF.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gYPdNAp9Q0[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMGYUmYLhAo[/media]
Certainly more interesting and helpful than another wacky 1/10th scale dragon dildo shotgun shell video.
Honestly.
"Top ten strange shotgun shells that through some MIRACLE OF SCIENCE made it down a smooth cylinder bore!"
Oh my fuck... Someone made a ".22LR Reloader!" [URL="http://22lrreloader.com/"]look at this site.[/URL] I mean if it works, all power to them, and I might purchase something akin to it because I'm a cheap jew when it comes to ammo, and prefer reloading.
[t]http://22lrreloader.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/22lr-reloader-kit-photo-300x300.png[/t]
[QUOTE=MAC21500;46951475]Bullet size doesn't matter, shot placement does.
Whether you inflict a fatal wound with a 9mm, .40, or .45, it doesn't matter if it isn't to the cranio-ocular cavity, because they won't bleed out any faster based on bullet diameter, and it could still take them 15-30 seconds to die. Until then, they are still in the fight trying to shoot you; your best option would be to shoot back and put as many holes in them as possible to ensure they bleed out in a timely manner.
Quantity has a quality all it's own.
That being said, handgun ammunition in general is anemic compared to rifle ammunition, and should never be expected to be a one hit wonder, as so many continue to believe about the .45 acp.[/QUOTE]
Hydrostatic shock is a big factor for handgun ammunition and even though it's not consistent between person to person, higher velocity rounds like .40, .357 sig, and .357 mag are much more likely to put a person in hydrostatic shock than rounds like .45 and 9mm are.
Except 9mm is faster than .40S&W in everything but the lightest of loads...
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46952335]Got a new channel you guys might be interested in: [url=http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfctRLXLbhoTIevEVrpsdIQ]The Ammo Channel[/url]
Guy is doing tons of gun builds, and posts videos describing everything he is doing and the like. Right now he is rebuilding a destroyed KGKT. He also has done videos in the past talking about gun-myths and discussing the ability to reload bullets after SHTF.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the share, just watched his video on removing berdan primers. He has some really great info.
[QUOTE=mastermaul;46952384]Certainly more interesting and helpful than another wacky 1/10th scale dragon dildo shotgun shell video.[/QUOTE]
Dunno, the idea of shooting an intruder with these guys is interesting....and arousing...
[img]http://i.imgur.com/gutGS5Zl.jpg[/img]
[editline]17th January 2015[/editline]
Could call the round "The Gangbang"
Or a bad bang.
So a Sjogren Inertia is for sale near my ass
[img]http://www.guns.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/sjogren1.jpg[/img]
1500 bucks, would this be at all a good idea
$1500 seems to be a pretty average price for those. And honestly, they're so cool and rare it seems like a completely fair price to me.
9mm AK teaser from Atlantic
We don't need Saiga 9s!
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmN3Ja3yLW0[/media]
[editline]17th January 2015[/editline]
Muh Afghan kebab remover:
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/pRosdOa.jpg[/thumb]
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/g4BM8Yd.jpg[/thumb]
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/22fTSKk.jpg[/thumb]
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/kotCNli.jpg[/thumb]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
