Benelli M4 threads

Armory » Shotguns

Posted: 1/11/2006 10:42:22 AM EDT

Now that there is no question that collapsing stock, full length magazine M4s/M1014s are being sold to the public, why can't we have a civil thread discussing the evil mods?

I mean, seriously folks, as if there was any question as whether a shotgun had a legit sporting purpose, all that went out the window when a private citizen purchased a fully featured M4 legally.

So now what? Can we grow up and talk nicely yet? Cause seriously I'm thinking about selling my M4 with all the bullshit that is going on now. If it's so contraversial that we can't even discuss it on the messege forums, I might as well get rid of it completely.

Posted: 1/11/2006 11:29:48 AM EDT

[#1]

How much you want for it?

Posted: 1/11/2006 2:08:23 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
How much you want for it?

How much are you willing to pay?

Posted: 1/11/2006 2:31:04 PM EDT

[#3]

I asked one of my local dealers about this. The word he received regarding their legal status was the parts already out there are "grandfathered". It might've been prudent to let Benelli resolve the matter, where it might possibly have been sorted out w/o the snap-issuance of a letter.

Posted: 1/11/2006 2:49:43 PM EDT

[#4]

When the Benelli customer service manager and I were having our discussions back in August, there was a thread right here in this forum raging back and forth about the legalities of the modifications. The customer service manager couldn't understand why people were having such a hard time believing that they were illegal, so I asked him to come here at that time (back in July) and post to the thread in question. His response was as follows:

"I read the thread this morning. I really don't understand what motivates some folks, but I honestly don't have time to post on the forum. If I posted, there is no doubt someone will ask another question or want to take me to task, etc., which will require another post, followed by another and I don't have a problem with that in and of itself....I just refuse to spend my evenings and weekends involved in something I consider work. We can agree the laws of our land are often confusing, contradictory and sometimes downright ridiculous, nonetheless they are "The Law". I have taken the time to communicate with you as I feel you are an intelligent, sincere firearms enthusiast who deserves an answer to his query. I just don't want to be a part of an ongoing debate that will likely rage into the winter months."

Posted: 1/11/2006 3:14:36 PM EDT

[#5]

so how many US parts would we need to put on an M1, M3, or M4 to allow us to make them whatever configuration we want?

There are US made stocks, mag springs, mag followers, magazine extensions, operating handles, and sights.

Posted: 1/11/2006 3:21:20 PM EDT

[#6]

I am having a difficult time trying to respond this this thread.

First off everyone must understand that I am an unpaid moderator at AR15.com. I have not even met the owners of this site or any of the staff. I only know one other moderator who is also a friend. I only got the job because this is a rifle board and nobody else talked about shotguns at the time.

That being said the owners of this site are highly respected members of the firearms community and have intrusted in me the responsibility of enforcing the code of conduct. This board is for the discussion of technical questions regarding shotguns, not legal questions regarding shotguns.
I am not a lawyer and I will not allow people who are also not lawyers to tell others what is legal and what is not when it is not clear that anyone here has a clue what they are talking about! But most important I will not allow anyone to suggest that we violate the law.

M4 said it best, it is not worth going to jail for a two shot extention!

Please can we refrain from these legal discussions about the Benelli M4 and have a civil discussion about the mechanical merits of the Benelli M4. MIKE.

Posted: 1/11/2006 3:23:24 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
so how many US parts would we need to put on an M1, M3, or M4 to allow us to make them whatever configuration we want?

There are US made stocks, mag springs, mag followers, magazine extensions, operating handles, and sights.

Hey, why don't you guys get some US-made parts in the works for us?

There can be no more than 10 imported parts on a non-sporting firearm. The imported parts are:

1. Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings, or stampings.
2. Barrels
3. Barrel extensions
4. mounting blocks (trunnions)
5. Muzzle attachments
6. Bolts
7. Bolt carriers
8. Operating rods
9. gas pistons
10. Trigger housings
11. triggers
12. Hammers
13. Sears
14. Disconnectors
15. Buttstocks
16. Pistol grips
17. Forearms, handguards
18. Magazine bodies
19. Followers
20. Floorplates

I don't know how many of the above parts make up a Benelli M4 shotgun. Subtract 10 from the total number of parts, and that will leave the number of US parts that need to be swapped.

Posted: 1/11/2006 6:12:18 PM EDT

[#8]

I believe this can be solved very simply.

A shotgun is a sporting firearm, end of story.

As to my M4, this isn't EE and I'm not going to discuss potential pricing.

Posted: 1/11/2006 6:16:42 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
That being said the owners of this site are highly respected members of the firearms community and have intrusted in me the responsibility of enforcing the code of conduct. This board is for the discussion of technical questions regarding shotguns, not legal questions regarding shotguns.
I am not a lawyer and I will not allow people who are also not lawyers to tell others what is legal and what is not when it is not clear that anyone here has a clue what they are talking about! But most important I will not allow anyone to suggest that we violate the law.

This board is for the discussion of shotguns. This issue is just as important as anything else.

We have facts here that support both sides. Pinned above is a letter from the ATF which is poorly worded and subject to interpretation.

There is absolutely no proof that anybody has violated the law at all.

There is proof that someone, at least one person, has purchased a fully featured M4 from a licensed FFL which was delivered into this country in that exact format.

There is proof that this is not a specifically banned configuration.

If you have a problem with that, I suggest you step down as the moderator of this forum. These issues are as important as any other issues that us as shotgun owners face, and if you're going to run the forum that we post in, I think we expect a little more out of you than to simply shut down every thread that involves this shotgun.

I'm going to give this issue a little while longer and if it continues, I'm selling my shotgun. I see no point in owning something if everyone's afraid to own it.

Posted: 1/11/2006 7:05:57 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
I'm going to give this issue a little while longer and if it continues, I'm selling my shotgun. I see no point in owning something if everyone's afraid to own it.

We have a Benelli M4. It has a fixed stock with a pistol grip. The LoP was too long, so we had 2" cut off it.

Nice weapon. Weird that anyone would want to sell his because he can't legally make his stock collapsible, but then it takes all kinds to make a world.

PS: If, after you sell your Benelli, you find a collapsible stock for a US-made Remington 11-87, let us know!

Posted: 1/11/2006 9:17:23 PM EDT

[#11]

I have no interest in a collapsable stock. I had one, and sold it.

Posted: 1/12/2006 7:27:10 AM EDT

[#12]

Tim, I have no plans to step down as moderator. I expect more from you than to assert that because someone purchased a shotgun from a FFL that it is legal. It is my job to protect this site from criticism and enforce the code of conduct. In the last thread someone suggested that breaking the law was ok. That is why I locked the thread.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. You are not a lawyer. You should be more prudent with your legal opinions.

I have no dog in this race. I do not own a M4. I believe the LE model should be legal for all to own.

Many people lurk on this site. We should be carefull in the advise we give. We would not want someone to run afoul of the law because of bad advise given on this site. MIKE.

Posted: 1/12/2006 7:33:48 AM EDT

[#13]

Actually, buying one from an FFL does prove that it is legal. If it was imported in such a way that it could not be sold to a normal citizen, they could not do the transfer.

I suspect that you're not telling the truth and this IS personal.

To anyone that cares, my M4 is on gunbroker. I'm tired of this crap.

Posted: 1/12/2006 12:26:36 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Actually, buying one from an FFL does prove that it is legal. If it was imported in such a way that it could not be sold to a normal citizen, they could not do the transfer.

Actually, there have been firearms sold that the BATF has later ruled illegal. I have no examples at this particular moment, but I'm sure that someone can chime in here and enlighten us.

Jetflyer is the originator of the other thread. He may be LE for all I know.

Last I checked (a few months ago), Impact Guns and Cal's Sporting Armory were both selling the civilian version of the M4 packaged with the mag extension and working telestock uninstalled.

Tim, I feel the same way you do. It irks me to no end that I cannot modify my shotgun. I haven't reached the point of wanting to sell it, due to the fact that it's still one heck of a shotgun -- even without a mag extension or telescoping stock.

Posted: 1/12/2006 2:58:44 PM EDT

[#15]

Why would anyone want to sell a great shotgun just because they cant add a 2 shot extension?

The last I checked, when I owned my M1014, even before the AWB sunset, I was able to add a 2 shot extension so long as I replaced the pistol grip stock with a straight field stock. Does Benelli currently offer a straight stock for the M4?

I will say that the all the M4's I have seen recently through LE distributon have not come with the +2 extension. I am not sure if this is standard configuration on LE guns or if the 2 shot extensions are in short supply.

Also, I agree with Mike locking the thread once someone implies they would knowingly violate the law, however ,I dont agree with not being allowed to discuss what our interpretation of the law is based information we have obtained through various sources. This is not a crime as far as I know.

Posted: 1/12/2006 3:03:52 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Does Benelli currently offer a straight stock for the M4?

Part # 81041, I believe.

Posted: 1/12/2006 3:16:20 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
When the Benelli customer service manager and I were having our discussions back in August, there was a thread right here in this forum raging back and forth about the legalities of the modifications. The customer service manager couldn't understand why people were having such a hard time believing that they were illegal, so I asked him to come here at that time (back in July) and post to the thread in question. His response was as follows:

"I read the thread this morning. I really don't understand what motivates some folks, but I honestly don't have time to post on the forum. If I posted, there is no doubt someone will ask another question or want to take me to task, etc., which will require another post, followed by another and I don't have a problem with that in and of itself....I just refuse to spend my evenings and weekends involved in something I consider work. We can agree the laws of our land are often confusing, contradictory and sometimes downright ridiculous, nonetheless they are "The Law". I have taken the time to communicate with you as I feel you are an intelligent, sincere firearms enthusiast who deserves an answer to his query. I just don't want to be a part of an ongoing debate that will likely rage into the winter months."

M4madness - No disrespect to you, but this rep from benelli goes on about how he doesn't have time to speak on the forum, and refuses to spend his evenings, blah blah blah. Then he lets us know he has taken time to communicate with us as we deserve an answer to our / your query. Then completes it by saying he doesn't want to be part of this. What the hell is his point? In short, he doesn't have the time but feels we deserve an answer but doesn't want to be involved. Why post then? What am I missing here? Is this ALL that he posted? He could have better spent his time giving us a short version of his interpretation of the law otherwise that paragraph is just senseless babble.

Posted: 1/12/2006 3:38:33 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
M4madness - No disrespect to you, but this rep from benelli goes on about how he doesn't have time to speak on the forum, and refuses to spend his evenings, blah blah blah. Then he lets us know he has taken time to communicate with us as we deserve an answer to our / your query. Then completes it by saying he doesn't want to be part of this. What the hell is his point?

If I am reading it right, I think his point is that as far as Benelli is concerned, magazine extensions and collapsible stocks run afoul of the 922(r) rule, that he has made this position as clear as possible, that a bunch of people complaining and arguing about it on an Internet message board are unlikely to change Benelli's (or the ATF's) stand on the matter, so participating in the threads would not be a productive use of Benelli's time.

Posted: 1/12/2006 4:52:15 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
When the Benelli customer service manager and I were having our discussions back in August, there was a thread right here in this forum raging back and forth about the legalities of the modifications. The customer service manager couldn't understand why people were having such a hard time believing that they were illegal, so I asked him to come here at that time (back in July) and post to the thread in question. His response was as follows:

"I read the thread this morning. I really don't understand what motivates some folks, but I honestly don't have time to post on the forum. If I posted, there is no doubt someone will ask another question or want to take me to task, etc., which will require another post, followed by another and I don't have a problem with that in and of itself....I just refuse to spend my evenings and weekends involved in something I consider work. We can agree the laws of our land are often confusing, contradictory and sometimes downright ridiculous, nonetheless they are "The Law". I have taken the time to communicate with you as I feel you are an intelligent, sincere firearms enthusiast who deserves an answer to his query. I just don't want to be a part of an ongoing debate that will likely rage into the winter months."

M4madness - No disrespect to you, but this rep from benelli goes on about how he doesn't have time to speak on the forum, and refuses to spend his evenings, blah blah blah. Then he lets us know he has taken time to communicate with us as we deserve an answer to our / your query. Then completes it by saying he doesn't want to be part of this. What the hell is his point? In short, he doesn't have the time but feels we deserve an answer but doesn't want to be involved. Why post then? What am I missing here? Is this ALL that he posted? He could have better spent his time giving us a short version of his interpretation of the law otherwise that paragraph is just senseless babble.

His response above is an excerpt from an e-mail he sent me back in July. It wasn't a post on this board.

The short version of his interpretation of the law was that the mag extensions and working telestocks are illegal on civilian M4 shotguns.

Posted: 1/12/2006 8:52:09 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
M4madness - No disrespect to you, but this rep from benelli goes on about how he doesn't have time to speak on the forum, and refuses to spend his evenings, blah blah blah. Then he lets us know he has taken time to communicate with us as we deserve an answer to our / your query. Then completes it by saying he doesn't want to be part of this. What the hell is his point?

If I am reading it right, I think his point is that as far as Benelli is concerned, magazine extensions and collapsible stocks run afoul of the 922(r) rule, that he has made this position as clear as possible, that a bunch of people complaining and arguing about it on an Internet message board are unlikely to change Benelli's (or the ATF's) stand on the matter, so participating in the threads would not be a productive use of Benelli's time.

Nevermind that it comes with a plug and has a legit sporting purpose (and can easily be converted) which is stated right in the law.

Either way, it's on Gunbroker until it sells. I'm tired of all of this nonsense, I'm just going to get a Super X2 Practical or 11-87P.

Posted: 1/24/2006 7:48:19 PM EDT

[#21]

Oregon: Just bought from a retail dealer a Benelli M4 (11707) with pistol grip and
collapsable stocks and the Benelli two shot extension for $1565. Was no problem.

Posted: 1/28/2006 7:24:15 PM EDT

[#22]

My local gun shop here in Washington is selling full featured Benelli M4s, collapsible stock and +2 extension installed, for just over $1900. The sales guy said that Benelli is shipping them this way and that they sold half a dozen in the past week. Just another data point.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Benelli M4 threads

Armory » Shotguns

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us