AR15.Com Archives
 Buying pre 81 drop-in-auto-sear
valblade  [Member]
6/29/2005 4:52:09 PM EST
After reading the heated debate about the m-16 bolts in the ar15's.I have seen this ad for as long as I can remember in the shotgun news.
ar15 to m16
drop-in-auto-sear
pre nov 1981
allows full auto and semi auto operation safely
drops in without machining lower receiver
instructions included
no ffl required
ONLY A LIMITED QUANTITY REMAINS!
$275.00
with free shipping

J.A.M
call toll free 1-800-723-2134
all orders shipped fast by post office COD
(CASH ON DELIVERY-SORRY NO CHECKS)
all nfa rules apply
we keep no names or lists
we sell no other ar15/m-16 parts

I wonder why its cash on delivery only?
easy to arrest you when your home.
really only a few remain.
this ad has been going on for a long time.
they still have some. after all these years.
It has to be a set up.
But if it is a set up why would it be illegal?
The weapon will not fire full auto if you had only the sear but not the other parts.
What if I just wanted to make a necklace out of it and didn't even own a ar15?
Of course I have no plans on buying this item.
But it would be a good idea to help other people stay out of this trap.
like when you flash your lights to other drivers to tell them a cop is stting somewhere.
Paid Advertisement
--
otto_esq  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 5:09:33 AM EST
"No FFL required", but under federal law NFA registration is required.

26 USC 5845 (the NFA definitions)

(b) Machinegun The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.


There are many possibilities, but imagine ordering this COD, having it arrive, paying for it, opening it and finding the "DIAS" is an old (" pre-1981") square hunk of aluminum, a file and a set of blueprints to craft a DIAS along with a notice that the finished product must be registered under the NFA and after 1987(?) the ATF is not accepting registration applications.

You file a complaint against J.A.M. with the postal inspector for alleged mail fraud (is it?) to be informed that your sworn complaint would implicate you in an attempt to violate the NFA, and that the inspectors would not work to get your $275 back due to the "clean hands" doctrine*.

* The "clean hands" doctrine is basically where you have no right to complain about a wrong committed against you by another due to your involvement in an illegal scheme, namely violating the NFA -- your hands are "dirty" also.


I've added the "Everfresh Translation" to the ad:

drop-in-auto-sear (when finished)
pre nov 1981 (old hunks of aluminum are a dime a dozen)
allows full auto and semi auto operation safely (but not legally when finished)
drops in without machining lower receiver (but requires extensive machining of part)
instructions included (how else would you know how to machine it?)
no ffl required (you don't need an FFL to deal in scrap metals and blueprints)
ONLY A LIMITED QUANTITY REMAINS! (even beach sand is "limited quantity")
$275.00 ($274.50 above our cost!)
with free shipping (international rates, written off as overhead from the $274.50 profit)

J.A.M
call toll free 1-800-xxx-xxxx (routed off-shore through to the JAMaican Islands?)
all orders shipped fast by post office COD (they allow international COD deliveries?)
(CASH ON DELIVERY-SORRY NO CHECKS) (you can't track us via cash)
all nfa rules apply (including those that make it illegal to follow the blueprints)
we keep no names or lists (we hope you don't either)
we sell no other ar15/m-16 parts ("we sell no other ar15/m-16 parts")


As for why the Shotgun News accepts the ad, it could be the ad itself is not illegal, it could be there has never been a complaint against the ad from any source, and it could be (for you conspiracy theory-types) a plant, "we keep no names or lists" (after we turn them over to the FBI to build a case for a search warrant). Remember, an indirect offer to engage in illegal activity is not entrapment if someone accepts the offer and is prosecuted for the illegal act (or more likely other illegal acts discovered in the investigation)-- there is no governmental pressure to break the law here.

Moral of the story: don't break the law.
If RDIAS's are several thousand $, and this one is $275, it sounds too good to be true, so if you know what you are buying, you probably know it isn't legal. Also you don't need to know the law, you only need to be proven to know that your activity may not be legal to be convicted under the NFA. (I'm looking for a good case to cite for this... I know the US Code annotations are full of them)

Disclaimer: I have never seen the ad, have no dealings with anyone or anything associated with the above ad, admit there may be many legitimate alternatives to the above, and meant the above solely as a parody.

Cheers, Otto
BookHound  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 5:21:35 AM EST
"Welcome to club Fed. My name is bubba. I'll be your roommate for the next 10 years."

These things are not registered in the NFA registry. Think about it.
wildearp  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 5:47:27 AM EST
Ignore all the other logic and say that it comes in and is complete. You then cannot legally possess it, and definately can't legally use it. Why waste any more time with it?
markm  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 6:08:24 AM EST
I've never heard of anyone getting popped for one of these, but I suppose it could happen. They used to be all over the gun auctions a few years back.

It's just too traceable of a transaction if you got one on the auction. Be careful, cuz.
otto_esq  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 8:22:31 AM EST
Interesting case:
USA v WILLIAM CASH AND MICHAEL CROYLE, 7th Cir (1998)

These guys made DIAS's but claimed they bought them from the magazine ad to try to get around the "pre-82" issue. The court noted everyone got it wrong about the pre-82 status being legal, but upheld the extended sentence for illegal transfer of unregistered machine guns for a separate conviction on other grounds.

Note the following language: "Firearms dealers would do well to assume, however, that all current transfers of auto sears must comply with the statutes, no matter when the devices were manufactured."

Cheers, Otto

ETA: the price has gone up -- they were $150.
jtb33  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 10:36:30 AM EST
Why is it COD? Simple: if you order it COD, someone has to be there IN PERSON to get it. You can't have it shipped to that PO box that you rented three towns over using your old college rommate's girlfriend's name.
nationwide  [Team Member]
6/30/2005 10:41:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By jtb33:
Why is it COD? Simple: if you order it COD, someone has to be there IN PERSON to get it. You can't have it shipped to that PO box that you rented three towns over using your old college rommate's girlfriend's name.



They got you buying an illegal MG, with CASH, on FEDERAL and POSTAL property.

You and Bubba are gonna get to know each other really, really well!
valblade  [Member]
6/30/2005 1:24:48 PM EST
bingo, bingo, bingo
resq2106  [Member]
7/1/2005 5:03:50 AM EST
IMHO, bottom line is if you can't afford to go the legal route to full auto, don't risk the fall. Our Black Rifles we love are an awful lot of fun to play with without the rock-and roll option. Enjoy!!!
Zach_S  [Member]
7/1/2005 8:48:23 PM EST
Otto, its 1986. I think May 19, 1986.
otto_esq  [Team Member]
7/2/2005 7:14:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By Zach_S:
Otto, its 1986. I think May 19, 1986.



Thanks. I verified that you are right.

The National Firearms Act
§ 179.105 Transfer and possession of machine guns.


(a) General. As provided by 26 U.S.C. 5812 and 26 U.S.C. 5822, an application to make or transfer a firearm shall be denied if the making, transfer, receipt, or possession of the firearm would place the maker or transferee in violation of law. Section 922(o), Title 18, U.S.C., makes it unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machine gun, except a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before May 19, 1986. Therefore, notwithstanding any other provision of this part, no application to make, transfer, or import a machinegun will be approved except as provided by this section.


That is one of those dates that had we known then what we know now... I could retire if I was sitting on a couple cases of select fire weapons for the $200 fee in 1985.

ETA:
And thanks for reading that long, preachy post.

Cheers, Otto
NAM  [Team Member]
7/2/2005 7:38:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By otto_esq:

Originally Posted By Zach_S:
Otto, its 1986. I think May 19, 1986.



Thanks. I verified that you are right.

The National Firearms Act
§ 179.105 Transfer and possession of machine guns.


(a) General. As provided by 26 U.S.C. 5812 and 26 U.S.C. 5822, an application to make or transfer a firearm shall be denied if the making, transfer, receipt, or possession of the firearm would place the maker or transferee in violation of law. Section 922(o), Title 18, U.S.C., makes it unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machine gun, except a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before May 19, 1986. Therefore, notwithstanding any other provision of this part, no application to make, transfer, or import a machinegun will be approved except as provided by this section.


That is one of those dates that had we known then what we know now... I could retire if I was sitting on a couple cases of select fire weapons for the $200 fee in 1985.

ETA:
And thanks for reading that long, preachy post.

Cheers, Otto



THe ban was in 86.

However, the DIAS was determined to be a machinegun in '81. DIAS's made before that date were grandfathered. Hence the 'pre-81' DIAS. However, as stated, owning a pre-81 DIAS and an AR15 is illegal.
DLoken  [Member]
7/2/2005 8:22:16 PM EST
Owning a pre-81 DIAS is perfectly legal, so long as you don't have an AR-15. If you have both it's an unregistered machinegun.
shaggy  [Team Member]
7/3/2005 4:57:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By DLoken:
Owning a pre-81 DIAS is perfectly legal, so long as you don't have an AR-15. If you have both it's an unregistered machinegun.



Not exactly that simple - see US v. Cash as Otto has referenced above. While not specifically ruled on by the court, judge Easterbrook makes a compelling argument that would very likely be brought up in any subsequent case involving an unregistered DIAS. Additionally, even under the now questionable validity of the BATF ruling (81-4) the burden of proof would be upon you to show it was made prior to 1981.
Paid Advertisement
--