Link to the ATF Open Letter on the Redesign of the Sig Arm brace here. I especially liked the "every time we said this is OK we were wrong so ignore those" part.
This whole thing is so silly. Zero mentions that it is utterly baffling. How you can 'redesign' a piece of a weapon by holding it differently is baffling to me. Is my Glock 19 suddenly something else if I hold it upside down in my weak hand? What if I use a Sig Brace to attach the pistol to my leg for super tactical under the vehicle tactical shooting at tactical threats? What if I brace it against my hip or groin? What in the shit does any of that actually mean?
Honestly I don't really care much about this but it is painful to watch. This is more baffling than if they were just banned. The darn things are being regularly used as butt stocks to essential make a paperless short barreled rifle. It was at best a very grey area but they were legal. Heck the ATF said in mutiple letters the brace is still legal even if you shoulder it. Why was shouldering an AR pistol with a Sig Brace deemed legal a few months ago now it is not? I simply do not understand how this mess could have happened.
Tblog's hope that the industry pushes back is one I have also. Even if the Sig brace, and I expect similar setups like the Thordsen tactical thingie, is dead in the water we need a better system for making these decisions, evenly and clearly disseminating them and sticking with them. Maybe with the movement of AR's and as of late AR pistols into the mainstream with big companies involved better outcomes might be reached.
The drama should be fun to watch anyway.