ATF special message.


That means this is one of their "Opinions".

NOT to be mistaken with law.

"§ 5845. 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."


A machinegun cannot be made with only a bolt carrier. THerefore, a bolt carrier is not concidered a  "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."


THe point was made in the last 4 pages. Maybe you missed it. Go back and start at page one.

Many Colt SP 1's were sold to the public with solid M-16 carriers. Are these gun owners in jeprody? I've been told by people who seem to know (usually) what they are talking about that the ATF has ruled that these guns were and are legal. I wouldn't take the chance however. A small investment in a used carrier could save a lot of problems.

I enjoy the debate but I believe the case closer is this. The ATF is made up thousands of individual field agents each of whom have their own ideas of what is illegal under the general framework of their training, which in many cases is woefully short on legalities and probably out of date. (If you think you are confused by the thousands of federal rules, case law and findings how do you think they feel?) So, their apparent modus operandi would seem to be, when in doubt, take the gun and the offender and let the court figure it out. Sounds like an expensive proposition even if you win.

Quite true.

It is better safe than sorry.

It is better to not have an M16 carrier.

They may charge you, and you may have to defend yourself in court.

The only point we are trying to prove, is that it is in fact perfectly legal.


It's like carrying a baggie or oregano around. Sure, it brings a few questions, and may get you some nice bracelets and a smack on the hood. But there's notihng illegal about it, except the way they proclaim a legal situation to be unlawful.

Originally Posted By NAM: Quite true. It is better safe than sorry. It is better to not have an M16 carrier. They may charge you, and you may have to defend yourself in court. The only point we are trying to prove, is that it is in fact perfectly legal. It's like carrying a baggie or oregano around. Sure, it brings a few questions, and may get you some nice bracelets and a smack on the hood. But there's notihng illegal about it, except the way they proclaim a legal situation to be unlawful.

That reminds me of another JBT thread...

Edit: yay freedom!

I called Hillary Clinton and she said all guns are machine guns and unless you take all the parts out you are BAD....!!!



This thread is going NOWHERE...  read the regulation as it is burried in this thread...  I don't care what any dick, joe, or even Hillary says...  I care what the LAW says and what the Court would say if I was in front of them...

It is not smart to have M-16 parts in an AR-15.... BUT.... a few parts does not make a MACHINEGUN!

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: Ok according to The Machine Gun Dealers Bible 4th Edition (2002) by Dan Shea you cannot even own, let alone install, a M16 hammer, disconnector, bolt carrier, trigger or safety IF you also own a AR-15 type rifle or receiver UNLESS you also own a Registered DIAS. This DOES consitute a illegal machine gun. I find this to be a definitive source in the C3 community. For those interested page 5-3 "Things That Get You Into Trouble."

Are you joking?  I can't tell[:\]

And I will bet in a point of law that the ATF didn't take your gun... you surrendered it...  

I will bet that they agreed not to press charges if you turned it over and being that this was a less expensive optian than a legal battle you gave them the gun!!!

This does not mean that if you hired a good attorney that was willing to fight to the definition and points of the law that you couldn't have won!  It would have cost you more to win the war than it cost you to loose the battle so the smarter thing for an individual is to surrender the gun!  Besides that, if you were found guilty, which I still don't think is likely, you could room with BUBBA for 10-years and that would be no fun!

That has been pretty much the point of this thread from the first page!

Legal... I think so ..........
Good Idea... No, not at all! ..........

Hey, I am not arguing with you... but... until it is heard in a court of law you were not found guilty and your case might have been won...

How many M-16 parts did you have...  Carrier, Selector & Hammer?  If so, that is quite a few M-16 parts... anyone would agree... This is different than just an M16 carrier...  Like I said, and will continue to say... it isn't smart to have m-16 parts in an AR-15...  I don't do it as there is no benifit and lots of risks for those that do...

Sorry to hear you lost a rifle...  I am not blaming you or saying you should have fought the case...  and I would turn my gun over as well, even though I think I could win in a court...

Are we on the same page...?

Oh yea... one more thing... the ATF doesn't make the law, they interpret it!  It is up to the courts to define if one is guilty or not and I have also spent A WHOLE LOT OF TIME looking at these laws as I respectfully disagree with the ATF and your oppinion!  Now, I am not so stupid as to take the ATF to court as someone will ammend the regulation and then it will be the law!

I'm goign to have to agree  with quarterbore.

I don't want to start a flame war.

Fact of the matter is, ATF doesn't make laws. They enforce them.

True, their opinion may hold up in court. But, the law is very clear.

Would i want an M16 carrier? No... it's ain't worth the trouble.

But i am very confidant in what the law says.

Comparing an M16 carrier to your rifle is rediculous. You had many parts.... of course they are going to bust you.

LAst time i checked, a carrier alone cannot enable full auto fire. By the letter of the law.. that makes the carrier legal.

Always get it in writing!

GREAT JOB!!!


let us know what happens.

I wish I hadn't been away on vacation!!!  I would like to have had this expanded to include the question of using an M-16 selector in an AR-15....

The reason I say this is that I would like to see the excellent KAC 2-stage trigger for the M-16 to be modified in such a way that it would be semi-auto only.  Imagine three selctor positions...

1.  Safe
2.  Single Stage Semi-Auto
3.  Two-Stage Semi-Auto

This would make a must have trigger group and I have been playing with a few designs for a couple months but some have argued that an M-16 slector in an AR-15 is illegal....

I disagree because of the same logic as applied above as an M-16 selector without other parts will not function as a machinegun.

If I am ever able to get a working trigger prototype together I will just send a sample to the technical branch for their oppinions...

Interesting read.
www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/staples_briefs.txt

"The government's expert, a ATF enforcement officer, Agent McLaughlin, conceded
at trial that the AR-15 rifles containing internal "M-16"
components are still legal semiautomatic AR-15 rifles provided
they are not equipped with the sear or auto-sear. n3 (Tr. p.
109, Aplt. App. #Q, p. 299). "



interesting...

Good place to do some reading.

www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/


"An auto sear, selector
switch, disconnector, trigger, and hammer (the first five parts)
are incapable of turning a semiautomatic weapon such as an AR-15
into a machine gun; it takes the bolt carrier to complete the job.
So, too, the bolt carrier can't produce automatic fire without the
auto sear.  None of the sales amounted to the transfer of a
"firearm", making registration unnecessary."

www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/us_v_bradley.txt

I was just thinking about the various comments here, and that there has to be "intent" to create an illegal weapon (machine gun), not just the accidental enabling of such. Thus, the fact that a bunch of ATF techs can somehow manipulate a weapon to fire twice with one trigger pull is not proof of intent. If the ATF could legally manipulate things this way, they could arrest virtually any AR-15 owner if they just twiddle things enough to make the gun malfunction. If they caught you with a gun that would go full auto with a toothpick jammed in the right way, and you were out shooting with a pocket full fo toothpicks, they might have something. But the final standard is what a jury thinks a "reasonable person" would do, and some kind of Rube Goldberg kludge to make a rifle slam fire is not reasonable. This kind of tactic doesn't pass constitutional muster, though various federal agents have tried it every so often. But from what I've read of the law, if you don't set out to create a machine gun, there's not really much of a case. That doesn't mean the legal bills won't break you, though, and each of us has to make his own call on that one. But a personal comfort level is quite a ways from being the law.

Originally Posted By Booth: I was just thinking about the various comments here, and that there has to be "intent" to create an illegal weapon (machine gun), not just the accidental enabling of such.

I would be quite cautious about intent being needed.  In the case of putting M-16 parts into an AR-15 AND the BATFE was able to make her fire in FULL AUTO.... how will you explain your INTENT as to why you had the full auto parts in the lower!

Now, this may well be out of context for what you meant to say for I have seen lots of posts about guys having guns double every now and then due to parts problems...  In that case, yes, I am sure the ATF would have a tough time nailing somebody to the wall and the same goes to the ATF making a LL and putting it into my AR-15 and saying that it's a machinegun!

Best advise remains...  JUST DON'T USE M-16 PARTS IN AN AR-15... unless you have a solid reason and then be prepared to defend the reason you did it as you are playing with a FEDERAL LAW with serious fines, jail time, and a perminant loss of all firearms ownership!

STUPID AREA TO PLAY IN MY HONEST OPPINION!

Steve
reguarding the m16 bc issue:
I thought the lowers were made so you could not install the auto sear without modifying the lower?
By simply exchanging the m16 bc in the ar15 would you need the bolt and pin as well?

Most receivers made require additional machining to allow a M16 auto sear to fit - plus having to drill the pin hole for it.

Some receivers are machined in a way that would accept a DIAS (Drop In Auto Sear) which is considered a machine gun by its self.

Some receivers are machined in a way that would appear to  accept a DIAS but are "high Shelf" such as the current offerings from RRA.

All said - a lower with SP1 config trigger group and BC is (IMHO) more readily convertable via LL (Lightening Link) than a std SP1 trigger group with a M16 BC. This is because a M16 Bolt Carrier prevents Full Auto fire via a Lightening Link.

my eyes are shot.took me hours to read it.worth it though.thanks for the post.

I have spent a great deal looking through all the links,pages and bickering in this thread.The original question got side lined essentially from the beginning.WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO USE AN M16 CARRIER IN AN AR15?Not don't do it,its okay,notokay ect.What is the direct benifit of using it over the standard bolt carrier?

M16 carriers have more weight and a different "Ramp" area that contacts the hammer during cycling to re-cock the hammer.

The difference in weight does affect how a gun will function with a given barrel length/gas port hole size/gas port position. The actual effect is minimal in most cases.

Here's my anecdotal tale: Two years ago when I received an M-16 firing pin with a new "kit," I called my local BATF and asked whether this meant trouble.  The local BATF agents asked: "Mr. Cryoman, does having that M-16 firing pin in your AR-15 allow it to shoot multiple rounds with a single trigger pull?"  I stated: "Of course not, and you BATF guys know this already..."  "Have a nice day, Mr. Cryoman, be safe and enjoy your new AR-15." was their final reply.

Cheers,  Cryoman

To clarify, here are the bolt carriers


During the battery stroke, the extended bottom shroud on the M16 contacts the upper portion of the auto sear. At that point, the bottom portion of the auto sear is holding the hammer back by the topmost hook of the hammer. The carrier causes the auto sear to rotate and release the hammer. The hammer then strikes the firing pin. The pause between hammer release and firing pin strike allows the bolt to lock. If this pause does not occur the hammer follows the bolt closed and rarely fires the next round.

The M16 selector and M16 disconnector remove the semi automatic function of the disconnector from the AUTO firing cycle. The M16 trigger is slotted all the way to the rear to allow the longer tail of the M16 disconnector to reach under the selector where it contacts one of the extended cams of the M16 selector when said selector is rotated to AUTO.

Cutaway


The M16 firing pin (larger collar than the AR15) only became an issue when Colt started slotting the bottoms of their bolt carriers. The slot exposes the underside of the rear of the firing pin and the larger collar can snag on the top of the hammer during the battery stroke.

Slotted carriers

Shrouded carriers

Hooked hammer


Removing the disco in a SEMI gun allows the hammer to follow the bolt closed. It rarely provides even double firing. Removing the disco most often causes a hammer down malfunction.

Semi auto lower parts kit


The slotted carrier/ hooked hammer combo was intended to prevent ANY double firing created by modifying the operation of the disco. This combo can, and has, created a lot of problems with bent firing pin retaining pins and failure to chamber or lock due to the hammer's interference with the firing pin. This is often seen on bottom feeder rifles and trigger that have been "tuned."

The use of M16 carriers in AR15s is the solution to most bent firing pin retaining pins problems. The extra weight also keeps the rifle truer to its original design thereby theoretically enhancing reliability. I don't know why comp shooters use them, I rarely understand why comp shooters do most of the things they do.

It is a small matter to "neuter" M16 carriers by removing a small amount of material from the auto sear trip face on the front of the lower shroud. An 1/8" makes a world of difference.

The first corporate attempts at doing this resulted in privately made devices to lengthen the trip face. These devices bolted into the carrier. The carriers with fully machined lower shrouds were "Fixed" in the same manner. This is the reason for Colt's sear blocked lowers. The sear block prevents the installation of carriers with M16 length lower shrouds.

All this said, I've been in personal contact with TWO persons (one friend, one business) who have been arrested, charged, and convicted of possessing unregistered MGs for having M16 parts (no auto sear, pin, or pin hole in either case) in their AR15s.

Granted, they were arrested/investigated for other firearm violations and the AR15 was found during the resultant inventory.

Granted, the ATF and the county performed extensive mechanical maneuvers to show full auto function.

In one case, the confiscated "MG" came back into the shop. The county that had confiscated it sent it back for "repair." It was considered a repair bc the rifle was already a MG by someone's (county? fed?) definition. Our repair consisted of drilling the auto sear pinhole, installing the auto sear and tweaking various other factors to get the gun to run FA.

In the second case, the local Portland news channel showed footage of an ATF agent test firing the confiscated piece. A large amount of electricians tape could be seen wrapped about the lower receiver. The tape was no doubt intended to interfere with the function of the disco. The agent attempted many times to get the piece to double. On his ninth or tenth try it did. Voila' it's a MG.


Gotta run, nice little forum you got here.

Not sure about the content of Big Al's piece, I heard on the flip flop that he did have M16 parts in it. OTOH, my SuperFriends buddy had everything EXCEPT the bolt carrier and auto sear.I worked on that one when it came into the shop.

Steve,

I understand that, I did read the entire thread, and the links, from page 1.

I used those examples to show the lengths the law is willing to go to in creating an MG. Just bc your rifle doesn't fire FA with some M16 parts doesn't mean it won't fire FA when they test it.

About 9 years ago I worked for an attorney that took a lot of court appointed firearm cases. He told me that nothing comes back from ATF testing compliant.

I realy dont car what other people have done its ilegal. Its in a special secton of the 5300 regs.Hopeing a leo wont know is stupid,they can take your gun to the batf experts if they want.I was in some large legal warfare here a few years ago that i won over isues like this but there not knowing causes a lot of time cosumeing trouble. ANY M16 PARTS IN YOUR AR MAKES IT ILEGAL BE VERY CAREFULL!!!!
                     Brad