Awesome, but dumb.

I would guess that it would be simple enough to determine if it was not actually full auto if the selector switch was only capable of pointing forward or up and being incapable of pointing back toward "burst" --- but I could be wrong.
I don't know why it would go toward "burst" unless it caused no actual difference in firing.

I've seen photos of these lowers before but never been interested, and to be honest have not given this much thought.

P. S. - None of the above is legal advice or should be construed as such. Just sayin'.

I think if you're building a replica this is a pretty big deal for people trying to get it to look close to authentic. Seems factory clones (see Brownells retro line) and builds of the old Vietnam era models are somewhat popular recently.

I have a factory bought rifle with a selector that flips backwards where burst/auto would be. In that position it acts as it is on "safe" and doesn't have any type of auto, burst or pictograms of any type that suggest what that position does. Could have been a bad day I guess when I tried it out in that position at the range.

The interesting thing is that this manufacturer at the time had .gov contracts manufacturing parts and full product including M4's, M16's and M2's. I'm guessing they used the same lowers (different engraving) and some of the fire control parts but left the important stuff out for civilian models. They were shut down around ten years ago for violating import/export regulations on certain parts and components.

Any cop with the slightest hint of knowledge of the AR15 would be able to tell that that wasn't full auto capable in a second. A tiny bit more knowledge would allow him to do so without touching the gun at all. Sadly, it is possible that there are police officers out there that are ignorant and poorly trained enough not to posses such knowledge. I do think they would be in the minority though, at least in areas where you'd be likely to have this lower out for their casual observation.

That lower and others like it are very popular with the retro crowd for building clones.

What some don't realize is that it isn't all that easy to convert a semi auto lower to burst/full auto without additional machining. In addition to the third hole, the inside must be machined to even accept the burst/full auto parts. Anyone that knows about the AR platform can tell the difference between a semi and burst/full just by looking at the lower receiver. Especially by looking for the third hole. it legally doesn't matter how the three safety positions are marked.

I generally feel that way about rubber grips on handguns.

I almost had an AR-15 taken from me by a state trooper who did not know one gun from another.The case was in back of my pick up heading to the range.When going through a checkpoint for inspection stickers he saw it and asked me to pull off to the side. He requested I open the case and I did. Immediately telling me it was a banned assault weapon and he was going to take it. I respectfully explained why it was not. He still insisted it was. I asker for him to bring a supervisor out to asses the situation ,which he did after my third request. Upon arrival the supervisor Sgt. immediately told the trooper to let this man be on his way. As I pulled away it appeared the Sgt. was giving him an a@@ chewing.

Moral of this story is just because they carry a gun does not mean they are familiar with all guns. They should be ,and know the laws but that is not always the case.

WestKentucky said:

It’s one of those situations you you will beat the charge, but you will not beat the ride downtown or the associated legal fees. Awesome, but no thanks.

Click to expand...

Legal fees? Lol. Yeah, you might catch a ride from an officer who doesn't know anything, but there won't be any charges. No third pin, safety won't go the the burst position etc etc. Writing M-16 on something isn't illegal.

I'm actually thinking of getting one of these lowers now, to put on my retro A2 build. Didn't know they made them, cool.

The "new" Colts. Trying to win the hearts back of those of us they ignored for the past couple decades.

bearcreek said:

Any cop with the slightest hint of knowledge of the AR15 would be able to tell that that wasn't full auto capable in a second.

Click to expand...

Ks5shooter said:

Moral of this story is just because they carry a gun does not mean they are familiar with all guns. They should be ,and know the laws but that is not always the case.

Click to expand...

Most cops don't know jack about weapons. I'd be surprised if 10% of all LE could identify that and determine it was a firearm receiver at all. In some places, you're presumed a criminal with that thing. In Texas the cop will ask what kind of goodies you have in your AR or what you plan on building on the receiver.

I've, in the past, dealt with enough *low-information* Law Enforcement and the after effects of their law-dogging on incorrect, mis-heard, misinterpreted or deliberately obfuscated *information* to call this an astoundingly bad idea.

Doesn't matter if you were legally correct AFTER THE FACT once you've dealt with issues like the legal-representation buy-in, confiscation, demands for return, items' completeness, correctness and damage, potential warrant raids and the like.

I've seen the worst case scenarios played out short of a death and THIS.... this is an epically bad idea.

Todd.

A friend of mine is a retired deputy sheriff. He told me that the police range they used for practice and qualification was largely empty unless there was a required qualification going on. According to my friend the majority of city police officers and county deputies did not use the range for practice at all. I've talked to police officers and many were no more gun knowledgeable than the average individual.

Once again, what is legal and what you can get away with (or what is a good idea) are not necessarily the same thing.

The key thing is the presence of the "third hole." Markings don't matter -- with one exception. A fake "third hole," that is, a circle engraved on the receiver where the hole and pin would be, has been ruled by the ATF to make the item a machine gun, even if the marking is in a slightly different size and/or position.

The internal machining is not critical (legally). There are lowers manufactured that would accommodate an auto sear, except for not having the "third hole." These are not machine guns.

None of this is particularly logical, but it is what it is.

bearcreek said:

[b}it is possible that there are police officers out there[/b] that are ignorant and poorly trained enough not to posses such knowledge.

Click to expand...

"It is LIKELY there are police officers out there..." would be more accurate.

I would not be surprised if 9.9 out of 10 "average" police officers these days would know the differences.
Most, if not all, of the police officers who served in the military when the M-16 was the standard issue rifle, and would know the differences have long since retired.

I seriously doubt any law enforcement agency trains their personnel to ID a firearm at a glance, be it from a distance, or if in their hands.
They are going to go by what is stamped on the receiver and barrel to identify (or misidentify, if the arm has been modified with a lower receiver like that one) any firearm.

Remember: Most police officers are not "gun nuts" or even "knife nuts".
Not unsurprisingly, the only firearm(s) they have are those that were issued to them.
(Possible Exception:Those in rural areas might own a hunting rifle or shotgun.)

Sadly, many law enforcement officers have bought into Hollywood's, and the Liberal's and Anti Gun Pro-"Gun Control" horse shi..."road apples"/"meadow muffins" lies.
(Sorry that I almost cussed,. There might be women and younglings present.)

I'm somewhat confused.
My understanding is Semi-Auto M16's are legal and full auto AR15s are not (Absent correct licensing or tax stamp). Did I miss something?

If I'm mistaken I'm immediately going shopping for a full-auto Armalite AR15.

There are people here on this board who have been members for the better part of a decade or more, and still have questions from time to time about this gun or that gun, yet they expect every police officer to know everything about them after 16-24 weeks of training (not all of which is dedicated to firearms.)

Really 460Shooter? I'm doubtful that I could tolerate my 460V with wood grips...and possibly also my 44Mag with spicy loads.

460Shooter said:

I generally feel that way about rubber grips on handguns.

Click to expand...

Well put, PapaG.

PapaG said:

The "new" Colts. Trying to win the hearts back of those of us they ignored for the past couple decades.

Click to expand...

My brother in law (local LEO) knows next to nothing about guns. 3 position lower, I'd bet he's hauling you in to figure it all out. He's in no way anti gun, just generally uninterested .

sparkyv said:

Really 460Shooter? I'm doubtful that I could tolerate my 460V with wood grips...and possibly also my 44Mag with spicy loads.

Click to expand...

Yes. I find wooden grips that fit my hand well to be more comfortable and easier to shoot than one size fits all rubber grips. I intend to put Nill grips on my 460 magnum. I’ve just had other priorities for my money.

I’ll share my impressions when I try them out.

94045 said:

I'm somewhat confused.
My understanding is Semi-Auto M16's are legal and full auto AR15s are not (Absent correct licensing or tax stamp). Did I miss something?

If I'm mistaken I'm immediately going shopping for a full-auto Armalite AR15.

Click to expand...

You are confused, but not in the way you may think. There is no such thing as a semi auto only M16, although if there were, I see no reason why they wouldn't be legal. Full autos, including M16's or converted AR15's, are legal (with the proper paperwork and payment to the crown) if they were manufactured prior to 1986.

Ugly Old Guy said:

"It is LIKELY there are police officers out there..." would be more accurate.

I would not be surprised if 9.9 out of 10 "average" police officers these days would know the differences.
Most, if not all, of the police officers who served in the military when the M-16 was the standard issue rifle, and would know the differences have long since retired.

I seriously doubt any law enforcement agency trains their personnel to ID a firearm at a glance, be it from a distance, or if in their hands.
They are going to go by what is stamped on the receiver and barrel to identify (or misidentify, if the arm has been modified with a lower receiver like that one) any firearm.

Remember: Most police officers are not "gun nuts" or even "knife nuts".
Not unsurprisingly, the only firearm(s) they have are those that were issued to them.
(Possible Exception:Those in rural areas might own a hunting rifle or shotgun.)

Sadly, many law enforcement officers have bought into Hollywood's, and the Liberal's and Anti Gun Pro-"Gun Control" horse shi..."road apples"/"meadow muffins" lies.
(Sorry that I almost cussed,. There might be women and younglings present.)

Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic. I believe you are correct that most police officers wouldn't know. That is highly dependent on where you are though. In my largely rural county many of the sheriff's deputies and police in the few small towns are "gun guys (and girls)" to some degree, and not just hunting guns. The chances of one of them knowing enough to at least check the selector switch to see if it'll point back is fairly high. In some neighboring areas, those chances are probably much lower. Either way, I do think it's highly unlikely in most places that the gun would get all the way through multiple hands into an evidence locker without encountering someone who knows *** they're doing. All that being said, personally I think having those markings on a receiver is indeed dumb, not so much from a legal perspective but from a general patheticness perspective. The crown has infringed upon our 2A rights, so now we get to just have a hollow shell with the markings as if they hadn't. Every time I looked at it it'd just make me angry.

The whole premise of this thread is ridiculous. Of course, we cannot expect LE officers to understand every nuance of the law. It's hard enough to get FFLs trained in the more common nuances- witness the FFL who refused to release an FN-FAL to its rightful owner and called the BATF because the selector would move into the third position and allow the hammer to drop but the rifle not fire. Does this mean mean I'm going to avoid owning an FN-FAL? Not on your life. Why should I live my life less free?

What if our Founding Fathers had chosen safety over liberty? What if they had said "I'm at liberty to own a firearm, but what happens if I meet a Redcoat who doesn't understand that nuance? Let someone else be the test case."

What if our brothers & sisters in Virginia recently felt the same way? "I'm not going to show up at a rally. It's legal to exercise our freedom of speech, but what if they misconstrue our intention as calling for violence? No easy am I going to take that risk!" Why do you allow the tyrants to terrorize and shame you into placing your necks into the yoke yourself? Why make their job easier?

At least Stephen Maize was honest about his intentions when he started the thread "Guns In The Home".