Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: Building a full auto AR15

  1. #1

    Default Building a full auto AR15

    A person I work with said he has a friend who is building a full auto AR15. Evidently he bought the lower somewhere in Palmer and it is stamped "made in Alaska" which makes it legal to build in Alaska. Is this correct? Is there more to this that I am not hearing?

    Thanks
    Rob

  2. #2
    Member rimfirematt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    Yeah, this doesnt sound good....The builder has to be licensed to make automatic firearms, and can only sell to military/LEO. The only fully automatic guns the general public can own are ones that were made during a certain timeframe and they have to have of course the tax stamp.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, Ak
    Posts
    3,909

    Default

    Yeah sounds like some prison time to me...

  4. #4
    Member walk-in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Little late now, but this isn't the kind of thing I'd be posting on a public forum if it was a friend of mine. As far as the feds are concerned it doesn't matter what is stamped on it, its illegal. I know you can make an argument that they don't have jurisdiction since the gun was never in interstate commerce, but do you really want to be the test case for that? Even if you win, how many years and how much money will it cost you?
    We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.
    James Madison

  5. #5
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    He is hoping that he will be covered under the states rights bill that was passed a while back http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/g...86D&session=26

    I think he is mistaken unless he manufactures his own parts to complete the weapon. The law specifies that it must be made from raw materials so importing parts would likely get him in a bunch of trouble. If he can produce his own parts kit, stock, upper, barrel.... etc then he would at least get the backing of the state AG for his defense but the Feds would still almost certainly prosecute and he would spend time in jail after having his door kicked in by ATF...

  6. #6
    Member walk-in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    771

    Default

    I wouldn't count on getting much help from the state, either.
    We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.
    James Madison

  7. #7
    Member GD Yankee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    PANC
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Stay away. Far away.

  8. #8
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    1- If the lower is already an NFA registered full auto lower, then it can be rebuilt into a full auto rifle again. You had to buy the ATF tax stamp during the transfer of that lower.

    2- Techincally, if you obtain a Class-II manufacturer's license, you can build a full auto whatever. However, you would not be able to transfer it to anyone.

    You need to tread very carefully here (er, your friend's friend does) and do some significant research on the NFA and all current BATFE regulations.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sandpoint, ID
    Posts
    1,974

    Default

    I'm a Class II 07/SOT manufacturer and I can build full auto stuff but can only transder to LE/or Gov't (ours). I have built full autos for suppressor testing but can't transfer them and I must destroy them when I'm done.

    BEFORE your friend does anything, tell his friend he needs to get in touch with ATF. If he has a full auto AR lower (which I doubt) made after 1985 and he is not an 07/SOT he is already a felon. Besides, FA is only fun when Uncle Sam buys the ammo!!
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

  10. #10
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    It would be a felony to manufacture a full auto anything after the May of '86 cutoff, unless you are a licensed manufacturer. Even then, what you make can only be sold to Gov't or L.E. agencies, or another Class3 licensee with the proper request/demo letter. Most likely your "friend" is involved in Federal felony territory, and ATF doesn't have a sense of humor about that. It's cheaper to jump through the hoops and do it legally than it is to pay an attorney.
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    248

    Default

    Is it the receiver or the sear that must be registered? Can you not take pre 86' sear assembly and register a newer reciever as a NFA class III firearm legally? I would think you could as long as you had the tax stamp and the full auto sear was registered. Sort of like making an SBR.....

    I don't know much about this so please correct me if I am wrong.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Between two lakes in Alaska
    Posts
    952

    Default

    I can't afford to feed my semi-autos, so never had a desire to get a FA. However; we use to have a guy that shot HP with us that had a full auto he'd set up and shoot after the matches (Grump that I am I always hated when he'd open up with it while the rest of us were trying to get our stuff packed up to leave!). He'd bought a parts kit (cheap at the time because you couldn't do any thing with it) and years latter he built his own receiver for it. It seems there is (was?) a loophole in the FA laws (may have been a court decision) that if you made it yourself and never transfered it it could be done. Tread carefully!

  13. #13
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    If you have a registered Pre May '86 "drop in auto sear" or DIAS, then that sear can be moved from gun to gun, as it is the registered part, not the receiver. The host gun or receiver is a semi-auto non registered item. A registered, Transferable receiver would have had to be made before May of '86. It is not possible to register a transferable machine gun because the registry has been closed since then. Only restricted dealer samples may be added, and those may only go to Gov't, L.E. or other dealers with the proper paperwork.
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  14. #14
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    There is no Federal "loophole" that if you make it for yourself that's OK. Some states, such as Alaska and Montana, have passed "Firearm Freedom Acts" that declare if a firearm is manufactured within that state and does not cross state lines then it is exempt from Federal law. Nice thought, but doesn't work in practice, the Feds will still bust you because it IS a violation of Federal law. Federal law trumps state law unless the state law is MORE restrictive. If your pockets are very deep, and you don't mind playing in Federal court, please try this theory of "that Federal law doesn't apply to me" and let us know how it works out for you. Inquiring minds want to know....
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  15. #15
    Member Kay9Cop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    789

    Default

    Technically, if the ore was mined and smelted in Alaska, the parts were all stamped or machined in Alaska, the assembly was done in Alaska, and the gun was registered in Alaska, then it would not fall within the jurisdiction of the federal government. There must be interstate commerce for them to have jurissdiction. Every ATF case will show the gun or part of it travelled across state lines. Now, good luck finding all of the parts, including their base metals, that have never ever crossed a state line.
    "Beware the man with only one gun; he may know how to use it."

  16. #16
    Moderator Daveinthebush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    4,403

    Default

    If it is the one I have seen a picture of it is not possible that the parts were made from Alaskan materials. :-)

    Vietnam - June 70 - Feb. 72
    Cancer from Agent Orange - Aug. 25th 2012
    Cancer Survivor - Dec. 14th 2012

  17. #17
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    According to the bill passed in Alaska base metals are excluded from the equation as are any parts that have non firearm uses. For example a forged aluminum block or stainless steel bar stock has a plethora of non firearm uses. A trigger assembly, AR takedown pins, barrel nut, scope mount, etc are all firearm components. If all of the machining for every component was made from raw material within the state then the federal govt "should" have no jurisdiction. The state has promised to provide legal support for anyone brave enough to risk it as long as they can prove that no firearm parts were imported. In the end if the state loses the only person going to prison with a felony would be the guy that built the full auto weapon.

  18. #18
    Member gunbugs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    1,382

    Default

    Like I said, let us know how that works out for you.....
    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind."

  19. #19
    Moderator hunt_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla--Cantwell Transplant
    Posts
    4,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gunbugs View Post
    Like I said, let us know how that works out for you.....
    Yep, the gov't has WAAAY more money to throw at this than some Joe Blow....oh wait...they dont...but since they raided federal pensions today, they do again...

    Wait...what?! We're still over 14 trillion in debt? Who KNEW!?!!

  20. #20
    Member walk-in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LuJon View Post
    According to the bill passed in Alaska base metals are excluded from the equation as are any parts that have non firearm uses. For example a forged aluminum block or stainless steel bar stock has a plethora of non firearm uses. A trigger assembly, AR takedown pins, barrel nut, scope mount, etc are all firearm components. If all of the machining for every component was made from raw material within the state then the federal govt "should" have no jurisdiction. The state has promised to provide legal support for anyone brave enough to risk it as long as they can prove that no firearm parts were imported. In the end if the state loses the only person going to prison with a felony would be the guy that built the full auto weapon.
    I happen to agree with everything you said here, but in the real world it simply doesn't matter. Alaska, Montana, or any individual who wants to fight this fight will lose in federal court. They're bucking roughly 100 years of Commerce Clause precedent that the courts won't just overturn. Even if everything from the raw materials to the finished product never left the state, they would still win by arguing that being able to buy the gun within the state affects interstate commerce and a national regulatory scheme. Don't believe me? Read Wickard v. Filburn and Gonzales v. Raich. This is also how they will defend health care, BTW.
    We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.
    James Madison

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •