# ATF files cease and desist letter with the maker of Honey Badger.



## Kraut783 (Oct 7, 2020)

Hope this doesn't go further....

FPC Statement on ATF’s Cease and Desist to Q, LLC Regarding the Honey Badger Pistol’s Status as a Purported Short Barrel Rifle

"After examining a sample Q Honey Badger Pistol, the ATF’s Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD) concluded that “the objective features of the Honey Badger firearm, configured with the subject stabilizing brace, indicate the firearm is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder.” FATD further concluded that it is a SBR as defined by the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA). Yet, ATF does not explain how it arrived at this conclusion other than vague generalizations that the firearm was “designed” to be fired from the shoulder and by virtue of its barrel length meeting the definition of a SBR."


----------



## DA SWO (Oct 7, 2020)

Kraut783 said:


> Hope this doesn't go further....
> 
> FPC Statement on ATF’s Cease and Desist to Q, LLC Regarding the Honey Badger Pistol’s Status as a Purported Short Barrel Rifle
> 
> "After examining a sample Q Honey Badger Pistol, the ATF’s Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD) concluded that “the objective features of the Honey Badger firearm, configured with the subject stabilizing brace, indicate the firearm is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder.” FATD further concluded that it is a SBR as defined by the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA). Yet, ATF does not explain how it arrived at this conclusion other than vague generalizations that the firearm was “designed” to be fired from the shoulder and by virtue of its barrel length meeting the definition of a SBR."


Have you looked at the "Pistol".
Their proprietary "brace" seems to be more of a collapsible stock then a pistol brace.
Sadly, I don't see this decision being reversed.


----------



## Kraut783 (Oct 7, 2020)

Oh, I agree.....manufactures have been pushing the envelope. It doesn't help that every idiot with a YouTube account shoots it like an SBR for the world to see.  Maybe, ATF will waive the $200 tax stamp fee to SBR existing "pistols" with braces.


----------



## Kraut783 (Oct 7, 2020)

Good breakdown.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Oct 14, 2020)

Didn’t watch the video, but supposedly one of the factors is the distance from the middle of the trigger to the rear most part of the brace is 13.5”, which is considered industry standard “length of pull” for a rifle. Less than that and it’s a pistol. That’s one of the reasons they are going after Q.


----------



## SOSTCRNA (Oct 15, 2020)

Kraut783 said:


> Oh, I agree.....manufactures have been pushing the envelope. It doesn't help that every idiot with a YouTube account shoots it like an SBR for the world to see.  Maybe, ATF will waive the $200 tax stamp fee to SBR existing "pistols" with braces.


That does nothing about all the restrictions on SBRs like differing state laws, interstate travel, firearms trusts, and all the other NFA Division psychosis.


----------



## Kraut783 (Oct 15, 2020)

Agreed.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Oct 17, 2020)

Latest update is the BATF have put a 60 day stay on their cease and desist letter. I assume that is for the ATF to figure out if, and how badly, they just fucked up.


----------



## AWP (Oct 17, 2020)

JedisonsDad said:


> Latest update is the BATF have put a 60 day stay on their cease and desist letter. I assume that is for the ATF to figure out if, and how badly, they just fucked up.



"Opportunity cost"


----------



## JedisonsDad (Oct 17, 2020)

AWP said:


> "Opportunity cost"


“Hey Jim, how many tax stamps do we need to have people file to offset a potential Waco situation? Oh wow... That many? Really? Maybe we should get back in the huddle on this one...”


----------



## Ranger Psych (Oct 17, 2020)

The thing is, stampy stampy stuff is cool. But not as cool as building a bed mounted repeating rebar ballista. That doesn't take a stamp.

Depending on rebar length and proximity to... well, anything behind a target, it brings pegging to a whole new level.


----------



## AWP (Oct 17, 2020)

Ranger Psych said:


> The thing is, stampy stampy stuff is cool. But not as cool as building a bed mounted repeating rebar ballista. That doesn't take a stamp.
> 
> Depending on rebar length and proximity to... well, anything behind a target, it brings pegging to a whole new level.



So much wrong and so much right with this post and they aren't always different things...


----------



## Ranger Psych (Oct 17, 2020)

AWP said:


> So much wrong and so much right with this post and they aren't always different things...


The original Pinterest.


----------



## DA SWO (Oct 17, 2020)

JedisonsDad said:


> Latest update is the BATF have put a 60 day stay on their cease and desist letter. I assume that is for the ATF to figure out if, and how badly, they just fucked up.


Honey badger just went to 12hr shifts, 7 days/week.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Oct 17, 2020)

Kraut783 said:


> Good breakdown.



Watched that last week [?]. I guess I don't get it overall. The "Brace" is not proprietary to Advanced Armament Corporation's subcorp of Q LLC DBA Live Q Or Die. 

The Brace is is use by multiple manufacturers of AR-pistols. So why is the Honey Badger the only one being fucked with. And from my perspective, almost all "Braces" look like telescoping stocks. Let's be honest here. 

Now, do I think the whole idea of the ATF's over-regulation of SBR's is bullshit?  Yes.


----------



## Kraut783 (Oct 17, 2020)

The "brace" was a really loop hole the ATF grudgingly allowed...people took it an ran, and abused the crap out of.  My only interest in this start of possible cracking down on braces is personal...I have two firearms with braces.

And the only reason I have these two, and have not SBR'd them, is simple.  I wanted a "truck" gun I could travel with on the road without restrictions.  If I SBR'd them I would have to file a form 5320.20 every time I went across state lines.  Suppressors don't have that restriction.


----------



## AWP (Oct 17, 2020)

This isn't a design problem or a legal problem, this is an Instagram problem drawing attention to something adults would ignore...


----------



## DA SWO (Oct 17, 2020)

AWP said:


> This isn't a design problem or a legal problem, this is an Instagram problem drawing attention to something adults would ignore...


add Fakebook, boobtube,flitter and any other look at me site.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Nov 26, 2020)

New update is that ATF is going after SB Tactical and their lack of “approved” braces. Again, they are staying real gray with what is and isn’t an SBR.

Newly revealed documents show ATF gave conflicting approval for pistol braces


----------



## Kraut783 (Nov 26, 2020)

hate not for you JD....damn...I have two that have braces...I will be watching this...guess I will have to look at SBR'ing them.


----------



## DA SWO (Nov 26, 2020)

JedisonsDad said:


> New update is that ATF is going after SB Tactical and their lack of “approved” braces. Again, they are staying real gray with what is and isn’t an SBR.
> 
> Newly revealed documents show ATF gave conflicting approval for pistol braces


Dislike for ATF bullshit.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Nov 26, 2020)

Kraut783 said:


> hate not for you JD....damn...I have two that have braces...I will be watching this...guess I will have to look at SBR'ing them.


The downside to just filing the paperwork and making them SBRs (besides the cost and the list), is that once you make them an SBR, they can never not be an SBR. Also, you have to file paperwork asking permission for every state line you cross. And god forbid something happens to you, and your family that would normally inherit your pistol isn’t on the trust and now loses out on your collection.


----------



## Kraut783 (Nov 26, 2020)

Agree...I hate having to SBR them, but if things change I’ll add them to my trust, hoping it doesn’t go that route. Hate the travel restrictions with SBR and SBS NFA items, glad silencers don’t have the travel issues.


----------



## Cookie_ (Nov 27, 2020)

JedisonsDad said:


> The downside to just filing the paperwork and making them SBRs (besides the cost and the list), is that* once you make them an SBR, they can never not be an SBR. Also, you have to file paperwork asking permission for every state line you cross. *And god forbid something happens to you, and your family that would normally inherit your pistol isn’t on the trust and now loses out on your collection.


I may be more "left wing" when it comes to gun laws, but even I think that's stupid.

I want 2A laws to be a federal thing since I believe all 2A laws should be constitutionally mandated. If I file paperwork to have a SBR (even though the current definition is stupid) with the ATF, it should be valid everywhere.

ETA: I want to see something solid like "a SBR is any firearm in which a barrel is more than 12 inches but less than 26" as an example.


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 27, 2020)

Cookie_ said:


> I may be more "left wing" when it comes to gun laws, but even I think that's stupid.
> 
> I want 2A laws to be a federal thing since I believe all 2A laws should be constitutionally mandated. If I file paperwork to have a SBR (even though the current definition is stupid) with the ATF, it should be valid everywhere.
> 
> ETA: I want to see something solid like "a SBR is any firearm in which a barrel is more than 12 inches but less than 26" as an example.


Well said.

My normal response to people who say "we just want common sense gun laws" is that the first common sense law needs to be "my guns, and permits, are recognized by every state, just like my marriage license and driver's license."


----------



## JedisonsDad (Nov 27, 2020)

Cookie_ said:


> I may be more "left wing" when it comes to gun laws, but even I think that's stupid.
> 
> I want 2A laws to be a federal thing since I believe all 2A laws should be constitutionally mandated. If I file paperwork to have a SBR (even though the current definition is stupid) with the ATF, it should be valid everywhere.
> 
> ETA: I want to see something solid like "a SBR is any firearm in which a barrel is more than 12 inches but less than 26" as an example.


Agreed, they should be nationally recognized.

One issue with your blanket example of over 12” but under 26” is it doesn’t fit every mold. The Colt Bluntline for example would be considered an SBR.


----------



## Cookie_ (Nov 27, 2020)

JedisonsDad said:


> Agreed, they should be nationally recognized.
> 
> One issue with your blanket example of over 12” but under 26” is it doesn’t fit every mold. The Colt Bluntline for example would be considered an SBR.
> View attachment 37173



It was more of an example of how I would like the wording to be clear and definitive, rather than me attempting to fully define what a SBR should be. I imagine a full legal definition would not only need to mention barrel length, but also overall length and buttstocks/shoulder braces.

Granted, there will always be outliers like your example or industry attempts to circumvent the definition (like this whole situation) but I'd still rather have a solid rule rather than this "intent or function" crap we have now.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Nov 27, 2020)

Cookie_ said:


> It was more of an example of how I would like the wording to be clear and definitive, rather than me attempting to fully define what a SBR should be. I imagine a full legal definition would not only need to mention barrel length, but also overall length and buttstocks/shoulder braces.
> 
> Granted, there will always be outliers like your example or industry attempts to circumvent the definition (like this whole situation) but I'd still rather have a solid rule rather than this "intent or function" crap we have now.


I understand that you weren’t serious about the exact dimensions and everything, I was just trying to point out that a blanket designation is going to screw someone over somewhere.

I think the logical decision would be to get rid of the nonsense designation of SBR and SBS. Can anyone show where either are inherently more dangerous?


----------

