PDA

View Full Version : Drop In auto Sears


UnforgivenII
June 10, 2004, 03:23 PM
Ok I have a question. I know I can buy a pre '81 DIAS and it won't be considered a machine gun but all those manufactured after would in fact be considered machine guns. Here's the question. Could I buy a newly manufactured(post '86) DIAS that is considered a machine gun? And one more thing. If I bought a pre 81 sear could I LEGALLY use it in a POST 86 gun?

Chipperman
June 10, 2004, 04:13 PM
Ok I have a question. I know I can buy a pre '81 DIAS and it won't be considered a machine gun but all those manufactured after would in fact be considered machine guns. Here's the question.

Could I buy a newly manufactured(post '86) DIAS that is considered a machine gun? NO

And one more thing. If I bought a pre 81 sear could I LEGALLY use it in a POST 86 gun? NO

If it is not registered, it is not legal to use. Period. The "Pre '81" is really meaningless for your purposes anyway. How do you prove it was Pre 81 if it is not registered? You cannot. It is legal to own one of these, as long as you do not own ar AR. Owning an AR and one of these is considered "constructive intent"

Bad Ju-Ju

Just stay away from them. All they are is an expensive paperweight. The only way for someone to legally use one for its intended purpose, is if they have a Registered Receiver that was made incorporating a DIAS.

Johnny Guest
June 10, 2004, 04:40 PM
The only legal - -that is, transferable - - auto sears are those manufactured and serially numbered in pre-ban days. There was a time when you could take the old ones, complete the paperwork to manufacture a machine gun, and have an AR15 or an HK transformed thereby. The sear became part of the gun, etc.

Then came the ban - - NO NEW TRANSFERABLE FULL AUTOS. The numbered and registered "drop in" auto sears became machine guns in their own right, and what used to be a, what? - $50 part, was now worth thousands. Many thousands, in some cases.

UnforgivenII, you write - -I know I can buy a pre '81 DIAS and it won't be considered a machine gun but all those manufactured after would in fact be considered machine guns. I'd be very careful about the first part - - If you have the unnumbered DIAS and a gun in which it'll fit, you do possess a machine gun, assembled or not.

I know of a couple of guys who paid big bucks for an HK auto sear, once they got the Forms 4 in order, and were able to switch it back and forth between, say, an HK91, and HK93, and an HK94. One guy even got the paperwork done to legally chop back his '94 to MP5 dimensions. So, with the sear in place, he has a working MP5, and when he moves it over to his HK91 (making it, in effect, a G3,) his HK94, a registered short barrelled rifle (SBR), is, in effect, a semi-only MP5 carbine.

And now, I understand, there are more and better restrictions on that sort of activity, but those who had the swap-out kits all legally assembled previously are still legal.

My personal knowledge of this arcane suff is rather limited, I fear. I know I would NOT purchase a numbered DIAS without proper papers - - I might just as well buy an complete, unregistered, machine gun, and THAT I'll not do. And, therefore, I want no part of an unnumbered AS, not for any price. If a private individual offered me a DIAS which was ostensibly properly documented, I'd go to a proper machine gun dealer and have him inspect everything, and pay his fee, before I dropped any money on it. There are just too many ins and outs where you can run afoul of the regulations, in perfect good faith.

The BATFE, like 'em or not, like their regs or not, pretty well hold the trump cards on anything to do with this type firearms. I don't like the regs, not the National Firearms Act of 1934, nor any of the later modifications and bans and such. I'd like to see them all made null and void. But I simply don't have the money to hire lawyers to fight all these fights, so I go with the laws (and cursed regulations) as they stand.

I've found that the BATFE is pretty easy to get along with, so long as you agree to follow their rules. If you say, "Okay, I'm ready to spend my money and my time, and jump through all the hoops and conform to these regs," then they'll work with you so you can own any machine gun you can afford. Let's don't talk about artifically inflated prices for what should be common guns. And, as for discussing the neat NEW guns that you and I can't buy for ANY price, because there are simply no transferable examples in the US - - It is futile and frustrating.

For at least the time being, there are a finite number of transferable MP5s and M16s and Bren Guns. These are kind of like real estate in downtown Dallas - - A limited commodity, and no more are (is) being made. You can buy a building site, but every one of them is already owned, so you have to (1) Find one for sale, (2) Have lots of money, and (3) Pay the applicable taxes. Same way with emma gees.

I fear I haven't furnished much helpful information to you, UnforgivenII, but I need to do a mild rant occasionally. Sorry 'bout that.

Best regards,
Johnny

MicroBalrog
June 10, 2004, 10:48 PM
The "Pre '81" is really meaningless for your purposes anyway. How do you prove it was Pre 81 if it is not registered? You cannot

Why do I have to prove I'm innocent? I thought It's them who have to prove the reverse. :D

UnforgivenII
June 10, 2004, 11:06 PM
Thanks for the help guys. I was thinking about getting my class III license and I think now that I will probably go that route. The only thing I can't find is how much extra it is to become and exporter/builder of nfa weapons. I guess I'll give the local atf guys a call and find out.

MeekAndMild
June 11, 2004, 03:36 PM
I have a related question. If you buy a registered drop in m-16 autosear, then that implies it must be married to a FA lower reciever, doesn't it? The reason I ask is that once a receiver is modified to fit an autosear it is modified forever isn't it?

Chipperman
June 11, 2004, 04:22 PM
No.
That's the whole point of a DIAS. It's "Drop in", meaning there are no mods to the lower.

"Not True," I hear you cry, "You may have to mill out the sear block!"
Yes, on some lowers you have to do that, but not on Mil-spec lowers (Bushy, etc).

Even if you mill out the sear block, that does not mean the lower is forever a machine gun. That does not "Count" in the eyes of ATF as making a machine gun. The mods that will get you time in jail are holes drilled in the side where a regular sear goes (just above the selector).

Don't you just love these laws?

So if you have a registered DIAS, you can put it in any AR you own. The AR is a machine gun only as long as the sear is in it. The advantage is that you can put it in multiple lowers, and if you ever damage a lower you can just switch it.

Hkmp5sd
June 11, 2004, 06:37 PM
and if you ever damage a lower you can just switch it.
The flip side being that if you ever damage the DIAS, by-by machinegun. If the auto sear in your registered lower ever breaks, you buy a new sear.

Chipperman
June 11, 2004, 06:55 PM
The sear itself is subjected to very little stress during firing. You can repair the DIAS, just as you can repair a Registerd Receiver.
They both have advantages and disadvantages.
I have a RR, a friend has a DIAS. They both go bang.

Hkmp5sd
June 11, 2004, 08:26 PM
They both go bang.
And that is the most important point! :)

MeekAndMild
June 11, 2004, 09:05 PM
The flip side being that if you ever damage the DIAS, by-by machinegun.

I'm reminded of a question asked the first time by one of the old Greek philosophers. There was a certain ship which had been involved in a great battle, I think the battle of Salamis. The Athenians kept it on display but over the years it gradually rotted, board by board. Over the decades it was gradually replaced until not a single board was the same.

So was it the same ship or not? Adnif it wasn't when did it become not the same?

What happens with your DIAS if the end breaks off so you weld a new end on, then the other end breaks off so you weld the other end? Is it the same DIAS?

Does it have a serial number? I have seen old cars which were entirely rebuilt except for that little plate in the doorframe with their serial number.

Hkmp5sd
June 11, 2004, 09:19 PM
Is it the same DIAS?
Here is Bardwell's explanation of ATF's ruling:
If the registered conversion part breaks or wears out it cannot be replaced, only repaired, if possible. BATF considers replacing it with a new part to be the new manufacture of a machine gun, and a civilian could not own it, as it would have been made after the effective date of 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(o). This wear/breakage thing is also true of the receiver on a gun where that is the registered part, but in general the receiver is less subject to wear or breakage than a small part, like a sear. Being larger, a receiver may also be easier to repair.

MicroBalrog
June 13, 2004, 10:36 AM
Being that the DIAS is the machinegun, you could, if I understand the court rulings right, make your own. Observe:

A) According to Steward vs. US, you may make your own machineguns if you make them from parts made in your state. Generally a problem, as guns are complex deals. BUT:

B)The DIAS is the machinegun. Make your own DIAS. This is legal in the 9th circuit court. As, according to the ATF, the DIAS is the machinegun, you can now go around and drop it in any off-the-mill Bushie. You are NOT manufacturing a machinegun by doing so.

C) You can only do the above and be legal in the 9th Circuit. Now, I can hear you whine already, but:

D)Alaska.

:D

Wildalaska
June 13, 2004, 11:25 AM
Exccept they aint approving form ones....

WildsomuchforthatAlaska

MicroBalrog
June 13, 2004, 11:40 AM
Exccept they aint approving form ones....

Stewart didn't have a Form 1. He was acquitted on the machinegun possession charges - according to the court, the NFA plain doesn't apply if you roll your own.

Tamara
June 13, 2004, 02:18 PM
The minute you drop it into the "off-the-mill Bushie", a whole bunch of "interstate commerce" just got involved in the action, thereby kicking the main legal underpinnings out from underneath the Ninth Circus decision.


You really need to put "IANAL" in your sigline, as well as "IANASOT" and "IANAFFL"... ;)

MicroBalrog
June 13, 2004, 02:52 PM
Tamara, while indeed IANAL, please follow my line of thought:

A) The decision agrees that you can legally make a "machinegun" from materials which did not cross state lines, do you agree?

B)The DIAS is the machinegun. The Bushie is not . Am I correct?

C)The act of manufacturing a DIAS is an act of machinegun manufacture. The act of dropping a DIAS in to the Bushie is not as the machinegun has already been manufactured

D)If it is legal for me to maufacture a DIAS from materials which did not cross state lines (thus manufacturing a machinegun), then it is legal for me regardless of whether I put it into the bushie, as the act of putting it into the Bushie is not an act of machinegun manufacture.

Am I making myself clear?

Can the real lawyers confirm?

Chipperman
June 13, 2004, 03:26 PM
"A) The decision agrees that you can legally make a "machinegun" from materials which did not cross state lines, do you agree? "

In the 9th Circus, until the decision gets overturned. (Which it will).

"B)The DIAS is the machinegun. The Bushie is not . Am I correct?"

The DIAS is the MG, until you put it in the Bushy. Then the whole assembly becomes the MG. If it did not, you could not put a SBR upper on it without registering it as an SBR, could you? The host gun is an MG as long as the Sear is in it. You can do whatever you want with it, except put on a Suppressor which is a separate NFA rule. Once you take the Sear out, it has to be legal in its own right. That means if it's a Post-ban Bushy, no collapsing stock, no FS, etc.

"C)The act of manufacturing a DIAS is an act of machinegun manufacture. The act of dropping a DIAS in to the Bushie is not as the machinegun has already been manufactured"

See above.

"D)If it is legal for me to maufacture a DIAS from materials which did not cross state lines (thus manufacturing a machinegun), then it is legal for me regardless of whether I put it into the bushie, as the act of putting it into the Bushie is not an act of machinegun manufacture."

Not accurate.

"Can the real lawyers confirm?"

In the end, it does not matter what any lawyer here says. It only matters what ATF's lawyers say. The 9th Circiut Ruling is tenuous at best. Anyone who is using that Ruling to make decisions about NFA weapon manufacture, is asking for a whole lot of trouble.

Tamara
June 13, 2004, 04:47 PM
Am I making myself clear?

You made yourself perfectly clear, it just also happens that you were incorrect.

B)The DIAS is the machinegun.

This is a legal fiction that only applies to a certain distinct category of these parts. The DIAS is only "the machinegun" if it is a pre-'86 DIAS that is registered as such with the BATF (ie: has its own Form 4, serial number, and is not "married" to a reciever.) Otherwise, it is simply a part that is illegal to possess in conjunction with an AR-15 in the USA, whether the DIAS was manufactured by you, by someone else, in your state, in someone else's state, or in low-earth orbit.

Wildalaska
June 14, 2004, 06:19 PM
Am I making myself clear?

Perfectly. Come up to alaska, Ill give ya the metal and you can make a DIAS. We can call the ATF together and Ill help get ya a lawyer. Call me when ya win (if)

WildinjectingalittlerealismfortheunrealisticAlaska

MicroBalrog
June 15, 2004, 04:57 AM
WildAlaska, I got about 2.5 years left for my service.

Leave a piece of metal lying around for me, will ya? :) :

RenegadeX
July 19, 2004, 07:16 PM
Why do I have to prove I'm innocent? I thought It's them who have to prove the reverse.

Because the way the law is worded, ALL MACHINE GUNS ARE ILLEGAL. There is a defense to prosecution if you can prove your MG was legally registered before ALL MACHINE GUNS WERE MADE ILLEGAL.

Fortunately for you, Mr Cash decided to be the test case on the so-called pre-81 DIAS. He lost and is now doing time in a Federal . . . . prison.

http://www.titleii.com/BardwellOLD/us_v_cash.txt

3 weelin geezer
August 13, 2004, 02:08 AM
. . . .

Johnny Guest
August 13, 2004, 09:10 AM
It WAS as pretty good topic. Don't know why it deterriorated all of a sudden.

CLOSED