PDA

View Full Version : 3 Position Selector Question


Aftermath686
11-04-2009, 7:20 PM
I need to know if it would be legal to have a selector that went to the third position (auto) but the rifle was still semi auto.

Thanks in advance
Andrew

sevensix2x51
11-04-2009, 7:22 PM
i dont see why not. its not like it will magically make an automatic sear appear in the weapon. i was looking at the bcm ambi switch. were you, also?

technique
11-04-2009, 7:23 PM
Auto is in the middle of "safe" and "fire"?

I'm not sure of the legalities or if that counts as a fire control part? I would assume it is legal.

Aftermath686
11-04-2009, 7:28 PM
i dont see why not. its not like it will magically make an automatic sear appear in the weapon. i was looking at the bcm ambi switch. were you, also?

No I managed to acquire a KAC ambi selector that is 3 position. The BCM is good to go though I have one in my other rifle. By the way they make a semi auto one.

It go's Safe Semi Auto.


Thanks for the help Gents I was thinking it shouldn't be illegal.

JohnBrian
11-04-2009, 7:29 PM
NO! NO! NO!

BATF would nail you for having ANY fire control machine gun parts in your rifle. Of course, I'm assuming were talking about an AR-15. Its called "constructive posession."

sevensix2x51
11-04-2009, 7:34 PM
NO! NO! NO!
BATF would nail you for having ANY fire control machine gun parts in your rifle. Of course, I'm assuming were talking about an AR-15. Its called "constructive posession."

dont you have to have a complete fire control group in your possession, for constructive possession? most oll's have a sear pocket, but no sear. they are not considered as constructive possession...

Vinz
11-04-2009, 7:41 PM
I thought they only approved the use of the F/A BGC's....I can't find it now....arrg.

vinz

rct442
11-04-2009, 7:53 PM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=129364

This could save your life.

http://www.bushmaster.com/images/community/defense_ar15_m16_parts_large.gif
http://home.comcast.net/~cjan99999/6520-ColtM16CarrierLetter-1a.jpg

I thought they only approved the use of the F/A BGC's....I can't find it now....arrg.

vinz

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f240/mvician/letter/m16carrierpage1.jpg

JohnBrian
11-04-2009, 7:56 PM
dont you have to have a complete fire control group in your possession, for constructive possession? most oll's have a sear pocket, but no sear. they are not considered as constructive possession...
From what I have read any M16 FCG part is a no-no. Even just one part! Stupidity, but the term "common sense" is not in the BATF's lexicon.

ETA: See rct442 post above mine.

sevensix2x51
11-04-2009, 8:08 PM
From what I have read any M16 FCG part is a no-no. Even just one part! Stupidity, but the term "common sense" is not in the BATF's lexicon.

ETA: See rct442 post above mine.

that is a very informative post. thanks!

Vinz
11-04-2009, 8:43 PM
This could save your life.



that was it....I suck at search-fu. save your asss too. literaly :p


vinz

Requiem
11-04-2009, 9:05 PM
I vote for this being a sticky somewhere... very good info.

rct442
11-04-2009, 10:39 PM
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/2707/m16motivational4.jpg (http://img43.imageshack.us/i/m16motivational4.jpg/)
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/5003/m16demote.jpg (http://img41.imageshack.us/i/m16demote.jpg/)

freonr22
11-04-2009, 10:43 PM
f/A bolt carriers are in a letter ok'd.. bweise has one or more some where (the letters) but I remember in that letter no fcg are allowed

CHS
11-04-2009, 11:15 PM
most oll's have a sear pocket, but no sear. they are not considered as constructive possession...

Never once, in my life, have I seen a semi-auto AR receiver that had a sear pocket. Every single one requires removal of material to fit a sear. And that's before drilling the hole.

rct442
11-04-2009, 11:19 PM
Never once, in my life, have I seen a semi-auto AR receiver that had a sear pocket. Every single one requires removal of material to fit a sear. And that's before drilling the hole.

Maybe he means a low shelf for a RDIAS? :shrug:

Now you know why Colt puts a block in all their lowers, so idiots don't drop M16 FCG parts into their rifles.

http://quarterbore.com/images/colt_sb_removal_01c.jpg

ETA*** You can clearly see the sear below on this M16

http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/8287/m16lower.jpg (http://img12.imageshack.us/i/m16lower.jpg/)

CHS
11-04-2009, 11:23 PM
Maybe he means a low shelf for a RDIAS? :shrug:

Now you know why Colt puts a block in all their lowers, so idiots don't drop M16 FCG parts into their rifles.

http://quarterbore.com/images/colt_sb_removal_01c.jpg

A low shelf is much different than an actual sear pocket.

Even the Colt pictured would need milling to fit a real sear. (after removing the block, that is.)

rct442
11-04-2009, 11:25 PM
A low shelf is much different than an actual sear pocket.

Even the Colt pictured would need milling to fit a real sear. (after removing the block, that is.)

This begs the question. Why do people feel the need to own unregistered M16 parts at all? Nothing good can come out of it.

ETA*** The OP still has a unregistered "machinegun" part. On a forum monitored by LEO.

No I managed to acquire a KAC ambi selector that is 3 position. The BCM is good to go though I have one in my other rifle. By the way they make a semi auto one.

It go's Safe Semi Auto.


Thanks for the help Gents I was thinking it shouldn't be illegal.

slick_711
11-04-2009, 11:28 PM
dont you have to have a complete fire control group in your possession, for constructive possession? most oll's have a sear pocket, but no sear. they are not considered as constructive possession...

Not exactly the case... most OLLs have a mil-spec rear shelf (rather than following Colt's SP1 lead on leaving more material/putting a block in the rear of the lower so FA FCG parts or a DIAS could not be put in). However, 95% of the lowers on the market have thicker side walls so the FCG pocket is not wide enough to accommodate a FA sear.

BDSMCHS, I *think* the old PWA Commando lowers had room for a sear. It's not something I've ever had want to do so I never looked too closely. Now I'll have to check the PWA @ work out of curiosity.

Aftermath686
11-05-2009, 12:20 AM
Wow thanks a lot Gents. Saved me some trouble. Guess I'll sell it...

Requiem
11-05-2009, 12:52 AM
This begs the question. Why do people feel the need to own unregistered M16 parts at all? Nothing good can come out of it.

Because the people's right to bear arms is protected by the second amendment and should not be infringed, arguably infringement=restrictions upon bearing arms.

Just playing the devil's advocate, please don't start a whole thread crash off this.

Steve O
11-05-2009, 12:53 AM
ANY...ANY...ANY...ANY... M16 or commonalty called "full auto" parts are illegal in the state of CA. It's a state law. Then federally there is constructive possession... so NO!

Steve O
11-05-2009, 1:30 AM
This begs the question. Why do people feel the need to own unregistered M16 parts at all? Nothing good can come out of it.

ETA*** The OP still has a unregistered "machinegun" part. On a forum monitored by LEO.

If this country broke out in to civil unrest, (Civil war, Revolution, Outbreak) I would hope that at least one of my senior citizen neighbors would have some M16 parts hidden in the old barn! Or we wouldn't have a chance of holding the community against the city gangs with FA MAC10's trying to seal our live stock!

That being said. There is no registration on M16 FA parts. Anyone can buy them in a free state legally as "replacements parts" for their legally owned M16. Parts are not registered unless they are conversion parts.

Steve O
11-05-2009, 1:33 AM
Wow thanks a lot Gents. Saved me some trouble. Guess I'll sell it...

uuummm... you should destroy it...

It is illegal to have any MG/FA part (Exception to BC) in CA. Period!