Alex Bosco, co-founder of SB Tactical, the largest company making arm braces for short-barreled AR- and AK-style assault weapons, recently sat down for an interview where he defended his company’s products and railed against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for attempting to curb the arm brace market.
In his interview with The Reload’s Stephen Gutowski, Bosco called the ATF a “politicized agency” that implemented its arm brace rulemaking to “get to somebody and put them in prison.” He also downplayed the four mass shootings involving AR-15s with arm braces, saying they were “just a talking point.”
the arm brace saga
Since 1934, the National Firearms Act (NFA) has placed strict registration requirements on short-barreled rifles (SBRs) — rifles “designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder” with barrels shorter than 16 inches — because they’re more powerful than conventional pistols while being easier to conceal than full-size rifles. Congress enacted the NFA to make it more difficult for civilians to own weapons like the 12.5-inch-barreled Tommy guns used by gangsters of that era.
Numerous gun makers sell “pistols” versions of AR-15s, AK-47s, and other semi-automatic rifles that feature short barrels but lack conventional shoulder stocks, making the weapons difficult to aim and shoot accurately.
But in 2012, Bosco invented the first arm brace as a way to help disabled shooters fire AR-style pistols with just one hand, and gun enthusiasts quickly realized that they could shoulder arm braces for greater accuracy. Gun makers began selling short-barreled AR- and AK-style weapons fitted with arm braces as “pistols” — not SBRs, which require enhanced background checks, $200 tax stamps, and ATF approval to own. Along the way, companies like Bosco’s SB Tactical brought more arm brace designs to market, including those that look and can operate like conventional shoulder stocks.
As discussed here, the Boulder, Colorado Springs, and Nashville mass shootings were committed with short-barreled AR-15s equipped with SB Tactical arm braces. The Dayton mass shooting involved an AR-15 with a Shockwave Blade arm brace.
The ATF attempted to rein in arm braces over the years with letter rulings, and in June 2021, the agency proposed a rule to clarify which brace-equipped weapons qualify as SBRs using a worksheet that awarded points for certain factors showing that the gun was “designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder.” In response to comments that the worksheet was overly complicated, the ATF did away with it in its January 2023 final rule, which clarified that a braced firearm would be considered an SBR if the brace “provides surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder” and demonstrates that it was designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder through various factors that echo those laid out in the previous worksheet.
Various gun groups and manufacturers have filed lawsuits to challenge the ATF’s arm brace rule, including SB Tactical, which is represented by the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition and National Rifle Association.
To learn more about arm braces, click here.
bosco’s comments on mass shootings
Bosco appeared on Gutowski’s podcast to discuss the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision finding that the ATF rule should be enjoined. But when he was asked if arm braces make short-barreled ARs and AKs more accurate, and thus deadlier, in mass shootings compared to non-braced weapons, Bosco said, “That type of argument is hopelessly ridiculous considering that the whole point of a firearm is to make it accurate.”1The Reload, “Pistol Brace Inventor on His Win Over the ATF | Full Podcast,” YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKolkIah2P8&t=2s, at 24:25.
He then leaned into the other military-style features found on assault weapons but not conventional pistols like Glocks: “Everything on a firearm is meant to make it accurate,” including “the scope…the barrel shroud so you don’t burn your hand, the pistol grip.”2Ibid, at 24:35. He did not mention that rifles are generally more accurate than pistols because they’re fired from the shoulder.
Bosco also attempted to downplay the number of mass shootings committed with braced AR-15s: “Let’s just use the 3 million [arm braces] that ATF says…are in the field, that people own. How many times were they used in some kind of mass shooting? I think there’s maybe three, is that what we said? That there were three different mass shootings…I mean, whatever, let’s say 10, let’s say it’s 50, OK? There’s 3 million braces on the market. If you’re going to tell me that this is something that is so dangerous that it needs to be banned, prove it to me. And they can’t do that. That’s something that they’ve never been able to do. It’s just a talking point.”3Ibid, at 24:57.
When asked if braced AR-15s are more concealable than full-size rifles, Bosco said, “It’s a ridiculous statement. I’ve seen a lot of these videos coming out of inner cities where you see these guys with AR-15s. Do you think any of those guys have a brace on their gun? None.”4Ibid, at 26:53.
arm braces boosted assault weapon sales
Bosco also stated that his company’s arm braces “changed the way people buy guns on the market. You know, a lot of people used to buy rifle ARs. Everybody kind of swung to these large-format pistols because of the brace.”5Ibid, at 1:40. Similarly, during a 2017 interview, Bosco acknowledged “that many who bought braces…did so to avoid NFA registration.”
According to Bosco, arm braces helped gun makers boost their sales after President Trump was elected: “Everybody remembers what it was like after Trump won. There was a real big slump. Braces really helped that. We’re hoping to kind of ride that again.”6Ibid, at 37:44.
the atf’s arm brace rule
During the interview, Bosco said the ATF’s final rule was vague and claimed it was an effort to “cast enough doubt”7Ibid, at 6:43. on the legality of arm-brace-equipped weapons to “chill the sales…and that to me is what’s fundamentally wrong about this. You know, you should not have a politicized agency trying to kind of…spin things in a way to bring fear in the eyes of its citizens. That’s not your job. Your job is really to kind of give us direction.”8Ibid, at 7:06.
According to Bosco, the ATF’s final rule was “too different” from the proposed version.9Ibid, at 8:48. He also alleged that the ATF “didn’t want to” give the gun industry “parameters” for braces “because they wanted to be able to get to somebody and put them in prison in some way, shape, or form. They don’t want to be held to a standard…And that to me is fundamentally wrong, unamerican, and what it shows is that the agency has become completely politicized.”10Ibid, at 8:00. Later, Bosco warned listeners that the Department of Justice “can go after anybody.”11Ibid, at 36:11.
While it is illegal to own an unregistered SBR, the ATF rule created a 120-day amnesty period for people to register their braced firearms as SBRs without having to pay the usual $200 tax stamp. Gun owners could also remove the braces from their weapons, install longer barrels, or turn the weapons in to law enforcement.
interactions with the atf
In the interview, Bosco argued that the ATF did not provide him or his company with enough guidance. He said that he “sat down with ATF, with the highest levels of ATF, on numerous occasions. I could probably count five different times where I had all of my attorneys in the same room, and we had been sitting there saying, ‘Tell us what you want us to do. Give us parameters under which we can work. Help us understand where you want to go with this.’”12Ibid, at 17:17.
Bosco described the ATF as people “with a smile on their face saying, ‘Oh yeah, don’t worry, we’re not coming after you. We’re really just trying to figure things out. We want to work with you.’” But he saw a “serious disconnect” with the “final outcome,” which he described as the Department of Justice “coming after” him and his products.13Ibid, at 17:52.
ATF documents obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request paint a different portrait, however. As detailed in this report, while the ATF approved two early SB Tactical designs, the company did not submit another 23 designs to the ATF for approval before marketing them as “ATF compliant.” The ATF also notified SB Tactical that it had recovered several crime guns outfitted with SB Tactical arm braces that it deemed SBRs or short-barreled shotguns, but the company still refused to send in its arm braces for approval. Finally, when SB Tactical did submit one of its arm braces, the SBA3, to the ATF in March 2019, the agency determined that the host rifle was an SBR using a lengthy analysis that mimics the language adopted in the ATF’s final rule. To reach its conclusion, the ATF examined the rifle’s dimensions and configuration as well as SB Tactical’s marketing materials.
Yet in his interview with Gutowski, Bosco claimed the ATF “didn’t look at…SB Tactical’s marketing material[s]…They looked at what, you know, some guy on YouTube’s material[s].”14Ibid, at 23:05.