ar -15 drop in auto sear

[rudyman]

I was flipping through my shotgun news august 20 2011 edition seen the add from su-press-on for the auto sear . I have seen this ad for 2 decades and wondered ????? Just a question, legit set-up scam or something sinister...... something I always wondered just tought I would ask.

 

[shooter521]

Conventional wisdom has long held that the ad is a running ATF sting operation.

 

[badmac183]

Conventional wisdom has long held that the ad is a running ATF sting operation.

but isn't it legal to own one of theese if you don't own an ar?

 

[shooter521]

but isn't it legal to own one of theese if you don't own an ar?

No; a drop-in auto sear is considered a machine gun in and of itself.

 

[revsaxon]

How is that not entrapment?

 

[Mr. Habib]

No different than undercover vice cops masquerading as hookers. They are only offering goods or services. They are not forcing anyone to buy them.

 

[ryknoll3]

No different than undercover vice cops masquerading as hookers. They are only offering goods or services. They are not forcing anyone to buy them.

In both cases, it's still a bunch of crap. Just looking to trip someone up who has a limited knowledge of firearms laws. They should go after REAL criminals. I think criminal intent should be part of most statutes. There's so many frickin' laws, regulations, rules, etc... who's supposed to keep them all straight.

 

[hoosier_sully]

Someone should run an ad right next to that one and let everyone know it's a possible ATF sting. Freedom of speech does not have to be spoken, it can be written as well.

 

[tradertator]

Conventional wisdom has long held that the ad is a running ATF sting operation.

Every time I see that ad, my butt cringes and I can feel black helicopters flying over the house. I wouldn't touch one of those sears with a ten foot pole.

 

[RoyalTenenbaum]

No different than undercover vice cops masquerading as hookers. They are only offering goods or services. They are not forcing anyone to buy them.

It is still wrong. I think the keepers of law and justice should stay on the moral high road.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

Why not someone contact them and then ask how long their transfer the sear to your local NFA dealer... See what they say?

 

[Stainer]

Why not someone contact them and then ask how long their transfer the sear to your local NFA dealer... See what they say?

That's what I was thinking. I'm sure it has been done before.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Hell give me their number I'll call them

 

[curraheeguns]

From what I have been told from people who know way more then me, an unregistered DIAS if made before ATF's ruling that made them illegal is totally legal to own if you do not own any other parts which allow it to be used.

It is in the same category as the open bolt semi-auto guns that are legally sold. They are all grandfathered in if made before the ATF decision back in the early 1980's.

The guy that is well known as claiming to have been the inventor of the DIAS is at the Lousiville show every show selling ones he "claims" were made before the ruling.

Personally I would never own an unregistered one because I wouldn't want the legal battle of trying to prove when it was made.

 

[CarmelHP]

From what I have been told from people who know way more then me, an unregistered DIAS if made before ATF's ruling that made them illegal is totally legal to own if you do not own any other parts which allow it to be used.

It is in the same category as the open bolt semi-auto guns that are legally sold. They are all grandfathered in if made before the ATF decision back in the early 1980's.

Yes, pre-Nov. '81 are legal to own without registration. I should add "not in the 7th Circuit" which is the Circuit that we are in. According to the 7th Circuit ruling in US v Cash, the ATF cannot say that something is ruled a machinegun but, if manufactured before this date, it's OK to own it unregistered. Again, according to Judge Easterbrook, machineguns have to be registered, if it's a machinegun, it has to be registered regardless of when it was made. Go figure.

 

[SEIndSAM]

From what I have been told from people who know way more then me, an unregistered DIAS if made before ATF's ruling that made them illegal is totally legal to own if you do not own any other parts which allow it to be used.

It is in the same category as the open bolt semi-auto guns that are legally sold. They are all grandfathered in if made before the ATF decision back in the early 1980's.

The guy that is well known as claiming to have been the inventor of the DIAS is at the Lousiville show every show selling ones he "claims" were made before the ruling.

Personally I would never own an unregistered one because I wouldn't want the legal battle of trying to prove when it was made.

So, if I'm reading this right, it's legal to own the sear as long as you don't own an AR15?

 

[RoyalTenenbaum]

So, if I'm reading this right, it's legal to own the sear as long as you don't own an AR15?

Sounds like an expensive ugly paper weight to me.

 

[CarmelHP]

So, if I'm reading this right, it's legal to own the sear as long as you don't own an AR15?

No, see above about the 7th Cir. ruling.

 

[VUPDblue]

Sounds like an expensive ugly paper weight to me.

Trust me, it wouldn't be a very effective paperweight.

 

[BarryJaxon]

DIAS

So, if I'm reading this right, it's legal to own the sear as long as you don't own an AR15?

NOPE