AR-15 vs. M-16 bolt carrier

[Jeff White]

Werewolf,
This is the part of the letter that makes installing an M16 bolt carrier in an AR15 legal:

We can only inform you that if this installation were to create a firearm that fires automatically, it would be a machinegun as defined; conversely, if it did not result in the production of a weapon that shoots automatically, it would be lawful to posses and make.

It takes all five of the M16 internal parts to make an AR15 function automatically. The M16 bolt carrier is closed at the back so that it can trip the autosear releasing the hammer to fire the subsequent round when the selector is set to the auto position. If there is no autosear for the M16 carrier to trip, it can't make it fire automatically. So installing an M16 bolt carrier into an AR15 that had no other M16 parts would not result in the production of a weapon that shoots automatically.

I would guess that BATFE changed their position on this after the US Supreme Court ruled that possession of a TC Contender and a Contender Carbine Kit did not result in the possession of an unregistered short barreled rifle unless the owner actually assembled the components into an SBR.

Jeff

 

[TexasRifleman]

Am I missing something here? What am I failing to understand?

You are missing the grammar in that sentence you quote.

Here it is again, with the important part in bold.

"In order to avoid violations of the NFA, M16 hammers, triggers, disconnectors, selectors and bolt carriers must not be used in assembly of AR-15 type semiautomatic rifles, unless the M16 parts have been modified to AR-15 Model SP1 configuration. "

So if you want to use all M16 FCG parts you need them modified to SP1 configuration, which is what Colt did originally to sell the AR in civilian form.
It means, don't use all of these AT THE SAME TIME unless modified.

If it was talking about the individual pieces it would say OR.

The remainder of the letter then goes on as Jeff White describes above.
You can't take parts of the letter and ignore other parts.

The bottom line is ATF isn't EVER going to tell you a specific answer, they will just warn you what better NOT happen. I think that's fair. And, an M16 B/C ALONE will NOT fire full auto. So, that meets both the spirit and letter of the law.

And, let's be real here, Colt wouldn't be selling new rifles with M16 B/C's if there was ANY doubt at all as to the legality of the practice.

 

[Werewolf]

Thanks guys: Both those explanations make perfect sense.

And, let's be real here, Colt wouldn't be selling new rifles with M16 B/C's if there was ANY doubt at all as to the legality of the practice.

Again - I'm in edumacate me mode...

Did Colt end it's policy of selling to LE only? I remember some folks getting pretty upset with them after the AWB over something like that. LE can have fully automatic weapons or ones that might become that way without restriction - can they not?

 

[TexasRifleman]

Did Colt end it's policy of selling to LE only? I remember some folks getting pretty upset with them after the AWB over something like that. LE can have fully automatic weapons or ones that might become that way without restriction - can they not?

Well, that was never really a hard and fast policy apparantly. Many "official" Colt dealers were selling the LE models to anyone that wanted them with no retribution from Colt. And as you can tell from reading the online forums, pretty much anyone that wanted an "LE" model could get one, to the point now that the prices for these are down with all the other models. Some have even speculated that Colt did it just to run up demand for their LE models. Who knows. If that's true, it was brilliant marketing. The 6920 became the "Holy Grail" for a while.

My feeling is that it's purely a cost cutting measure for Colt, and I bet you'll see more useage of the M16 b/c in other models over time. If there's no legal problem, and no performance impact, why bother with 2 versions to manufacture?

And, an LEO with an M16 bolt carrier installed would be in just as much trouble legally as any of us. LEO's get no special privileges as far as that stuff goes, they can just get post-86 MG's. They still have to go through paperwork to get that done.