PDA

View Full Version : Full Auto Registration



Budget
01-25-2012, 07:26 PM
http://mapartsinc.com/productsDetail.asp?id=583


I am wondering what I would have to go through to get this registered. For$90, seems like a really cheap way to get full auto in my AR. Is this even legal? I know the ATF makes it nearly impossible to set up, I am wondering if this is an exception. Thanks for the responses in advance.

Also, this seemed an appropriate category, but I'm really hoping to get some real, legal help here. Thanks again.

jm0502
01-25-2012, 07:29 PM
best to not even think about doing it.

Budget
01-25-2012, 07:34 PM
That was my thought, but I figured I'd ask. If you never ask, the answer will always be no.

jm0502
01-25-2012, 07:39 PM
Its easy to get the parts, but if you dont have a registered lower and having possession of all the parts it could be considered intent to build and 10 years in jail.

Joeywhat
01-25-2012, 07:52 PM
What do you have to do? Get a time machine and go back to 1986...

HemiChallenger
01-25-2012, 08:35 PM
I'd just stay away from that. Theres always those bump-fire stocks too. Better yet go to chewys full auto shoot and get it out of your system. That's what I do.

Once you fire full auto you'll see that it's not really all that practical. However I dont agree with our current laws.

pgaplayerless
01-25-2012, 09:47 PM
Its easy to get the parts, but if you dont have a registered lower and having possession of all the parts it could be considered intent to build and 10 years in jail.

not really. Not that long ago all parts kits came with all the FA goodies.

jm0502
01-25-2012, 09:50 PM
not really. Not that long ago all parts kits came with all the FA goodies.
they came with the parts, but having them is a risk. a few years ago it was a big deal to have a full auto boltcarrier.

pgaplayerless
01-25-2012, 09:52 PM
they came with the parts, but having them is a risk. a few years ago it was a big deal to have a full auto boltcarrier.

it was assumed it was a big deal to have them inside the functional weapon

jm0502
01-25-2012, 10:01 PM
it was assumed it was a big deal to have them inside the functional weapon

They have classified a pot scrubber as a silencer, Do you really trust them?

TWS-Mike
01-25-2012, 11:02 PM
it was assumed it was a big deal to have them inside the functional weapon


If you are talking M-16 Bolt Carriers in AR-15's I believe that was settled already. New Colts ship with em too...
(ATF FTB letter below)

But the rest of the parts above referenced by the OP are definite jail time.

Stay far away.... :hide:

http://www.blacksuntactical.com/assets/images/atfm16letter.pdf

trapdoorman
01-26-2012, 01:03 AM
This is no legal opinion, just how I have understood things.

The M-16 full auto parts being referred to here are generally sold for use as replacement parts in LEGALLY REGISTERED MACHINE GUNS.

The only guns that can be currently manufactured or converted to full auto are those produced for government, police, or export by a licenced class II manufacturer.

It is illegal to posess any parts that can be used to convert a semi-auto to a full auto if you have in your possession the semi-auto firearm they could be used in.

A legally registered and transferrable M-16 is currently selling in the neighborhood of $12,000 to $20,000, depending on brand, condition, and other factors.


If you want to play, you gotta pay

:bigun2:

trapdoorman
01-26-2012, 04:29 PM
I'd just stay away from that. Theres always those bump-fire stocks too. Better yet go to chewys full auto shoot and get it out of your system. That's what I do.

Once you fire full auto you'll see that it's not really all that practical. However I dont agree with our current laws.

I would be extremely careful with those bumpfire stocks. If memory serves me correctly there was some controversy between the ATF and the company producing them. Initially they were approved but ATF later did a 180 and ruled that when attached to a rifle it created a machine gun.

If anyone has the latest info on these let everyone know.

TWS-Mike
01-26-2012, 04:53 PM
I believe you are thinking of the Atkins Accelerator, (2006) it had a spring in it, so it was a mechanical device that assisted the return, initially approved by ATF, and then reversed their initial decision.


The difference with the slide fire is that the shooters are manipulating the weapon on their own power, and attaining simulated full auto without the help of springs, etc... aka,

Not saying the ATF won't change it's mind on slide fire in the future, but as far as I am aware, they haven't yet.


I would be extremely careful with those bumpfire stocks. If memory serves me correctly there was some controversy between the ATF and the company producing them. Initially they were approved but ATF later did a 180 and ruled that when attached to a rifle it created a machine gun.

If anyone has the latest info on these let everyone know.

trapdoorman
01-26-2012, 10:23 PM
Thanks Mike,

I was referring to the atkins devise. I don't really keep track of these types of accessories and didn't realize someone was making one that worked without the spring. I'd even worry about possesing one of those because it still accomplishes the same thing.

It is definitely troubling when the ATF can give a company a written opinion that their product is perfectly legal and in complience with current law and then later reverse that opinion, placing not only the company but all of its customers in legal jeopardy.

rjrivero
01-26-2012, 10:31 PM
Thanks Mike,

I was referring to the atkins devise. I don't really keep track of these types of accessories and didn't realize someone was making one that worked without the spring. I'd even worry about possesing one of those because it still accomplishes the same thing.

It is definitely troubling when the ATF can give a company a written opinion that their product is perfectly legal and in complience with current law and then later reverse that opinion, placing not only the company but all of its customers in legal jeopardy.
Seems as if we aren't the only ones who have noticed these ATF issues. The Washington Times ran this article (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/2/gun-makers-baffled-by-atf-criteria/?page=all) a little while back.

asteinman
01-27-2012, 10:21 PM
I saw those bump fire devices on you tube. I see they have one now for the AK47. Was thinking about getting one. Probably won't end up doing it though