New IWI Uzi Pistol for 2015

**dkf** · January 4th, 2015, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by ungawa

You think the ATF is going to continue putting up with this?

I suppose the Gen V Glock will come with a brace.

Once my current build is finished I planned to build a pistol with the sig brace. I am going to hold off because I think the ATF is going to make some changes not in the braces favor.

If IWI can come out with their braced UZI I would think Mako could come out with a brace version of their Glock stock. http://www.botach.com/mako-tactical-...19-23-pistols/

**wanneroo** · January 4th, 2015, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by ungawa

You think the ATF is going to continue putting up with this?

Cats already out of the bag and it's going to be a hard time stuffing it back in.

**raxar** · January 4th, 2015, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by wanneroo

Cats already out of the bag and it's going to be a hard time stuffing it back in.

You think they'd mind arresting a few hundred people just to make a point?

**wanneroo** · January 4th, 2015, 10:44 PM

Originally Posted by raxar

You think they'd mind arresting a few hundred people just to make a point?

I think they would walk a line on it because overreacting might shine a light on the law in regards to why 16.25 inches is legal and 15.75 inches is prison time and why we even need that law.

**ungawa** · January 5th, 2015, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by wanneroo

Cats already out of the bag and it's going to be a hard time stuffing it back in.

You mean like the Atkins Accelerator, Maadi-Griffin, XMG34, etc.?

The ATF has ZERO problem saying, "Our mistake, you can't have it." They do it all the time and they LOVE it.

**ungawa** · January 5th, 2015, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by wanneroo

I think they would walk a line on it because overreacting might shine a light on the law in regards to why 16.25 inches is legal and 15.75 inches is prison time and why we even need that law.

That's not how they think

They think more like this:

American Suppressor Association: "Hey ATF, can we drop the chief LEO signature requirement for Forms 1 and 4 now? It's an anachronism. ATF knows everywhere that NFA items are legal and illegal. And you do background checks on all individuals. People are forming trusts and corps simply because chief LEO won't sign.

ATF Response: "F you, we are writing a rule that requires trusts and corps to get chief LEO signature and background checks, too."

**PA1936MN** · January 5th, 2015, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by 300WM

Yea, but you could put a 2.5X8 Nikon on it and amaze your slow fire friends.

Talking about the rail under it not on top.

**wanneroo** · January 5th, 2015, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by ungawa

You mean like the Atkins Accelerator, Maadi-Griffin, XMG34, etc.?

The ATF has ZERO problem saying, "Our mistake, you can't have it." They do it all the time and they LOVE it.

I'm sure they do, but the way to win is to flood the market with things like the braces and slidefire. When there is only a couple hundred or thousands out there, it's much easier to control.

**ungawa** · January 5th, 2015, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by wanneroo

I'm sure they do, but the way to win is to flood the market with things like the braces and slidefire. When there is only a couple hundred or thousands out there, it's much easier to control.

There are tens or hundreds of thousands of 14" rifle barrels out there. ATF doesn't care. Get caught with one on a rifle and no stamp, 10 years and $250K. It's that simple.

Here is a Glock stock:

Plenty of them out there. ATF doesn't care.

Why don't you put one of these on your Glock instead of waiting for a Glock brace?

By your line of reasoning, they are out there so you can.