Colt question?

[danski26]

I have been reading the the thread that has developed into a discussion about Colt and I don't understand what the issue is. I believe one side is saying that Colt changed some of the specs on there civilian ar-15's and at one time stopped selling ar-15 to civilians. Is this correct?

I believe the other side is saying that the changes were only to make it more difficult to illegaly modify a semi-auto ar-15 to select fire.

Then there is discussion as to Colt not allowing select fire ar-15 to be sold to civilians.

I can understand Colts caving in to modify there ar-15's to make it more difficult to make an illegal select fire. What is the downside to that? True no one else in the market did it but so what?

Furthermore, there is a discussion that Colt stopped selling select fires to civilans even "in states it was legal to do so?" I don't understand. I thought the sale to civilians of select fire weapons manufatured after a certain date, "1968?", is prohibited by federal law?

Whats the story?

[lead-1]

This is not total known fact but my understanding is that Colt being the maker of the military full autos and at the time being the only maker of civilian AR's the gov. was afraid that it would be too easy to make full autos at home with available parts. The Gov had Colt make the civilian versions with larger pin to prevent swapping parts and prevent upper swapping by using a larger offset pivot pin for the upper and lower joint. Later they made the raised lower shelf to prevent the use of a drop in auto sear or lightning link and all along the Gov more or less made Colt employ a Gov agent to oversee the assembly of Colt weapons to make sure they were following the Gov regulations.


Edited to remove the 1968 gun control act statement because this was way off base as mike in co insinuated and I don't like being that far off, lol.

[mike in co]

I have been reading the the thread that has developed into a discussion about Colt and I don't understand what the issue is. I believe one side is saying that Colt changed some of the specs on there civilian ar-15's and at one time stopped selling ar-15 to civilians. Is this correct?

I believe the other side is saying that the changes were only to make it more difficult to illegaly modify a semi-auto ar-15 to select fire.

Then there is discussion as to Colt not allowing select fire ar-15 to be sold to civilians.

I can understand Colts caving in to modify there ar-15's to make it more difficult to make an illegal select fire. What is the downside to that? True no one else in the market did it but so what?

Furthermore, there is a discussion that Colt stopped selling select fires to civilans even "in states it was legal to do so?" I don't understand. I thought the sale to civilians of select fire weapons manufatured after a certain date, "1968?", is prohibited by federal law?

Whats the story?

i dont understand what you don't understand...............

its pretty clear.

but then if you were not around then or into guns then, then the revisionist version of the story is what you have.

colt attempetted to gain favor with the government. how ? buy selling away your gun rights...your abillitiy to legally own a full auto weapon. why would they do this ? to optain/continue contracts for work building government rifles...

the sale of full auto guns is allowed in states that allow ownership. the permitting process is in the form of a FEDERAL TAX STAMP. a one time fee( per artical) . while it is illegal to require a voting tax, it is not illegal to have a firearms tax......strange.
its always about the money.

as a business, they cared less about your rights, than thier ability to make a profit.

politics and money...money and politcs......

[smkummer]

The original AR-15 was select fire(models 601, 602 and 603). When the military adopted the rifle they designated it M-16. So Colt also then called its select fire rifle a M16 and it then designed a semi auto now called the AR-15 with serial numbers in the "SP1`" numbering. The SP1 had features such as a large takedown pin that would not allow full auto uppers such as short CAR uppers to simply slap on. They also would not allow a M16 auto sear to simply fit with just a hole drilled to accomodate. But later aftermarket drop in auto sears were made just for the SP1. If one wanted to before May 19, 1986, they could file a form 1 and have thier AR-15 approved for full auto. Drop in auto sears made this very easy. The 1990 Colt catalog has 2 issues. The AR15s were anounced to be only available to police (1st issue) but the new "Sporter"(2nd issue) with a sear block and no baynet lug were available to civilains. These guns are refered to as "blue label" guns as the boxes had a blue label on them. The blue laber sporters were not quite civilian enough for the assualt weapon ban of 1994 so the flash hider had to leave and then the gun was called the match target.
From 1968 to 1986 all civilian legal full autos had to be domestically produced. Smith 76, Colt M16 and Ruger AC556 were the most popular as were the Macs. During this time "tube" guns were also produced such as the sten and MP40's. They had their original recievers cut and a US made reciever was made so now the weapon was considered US made.
I have read that Colt wanted paperwork showing its M16 was sold to law enforcement as a company policy. If the class 3 dealer would not comply, then he would no longer get a new M16 from Colt. Ruger may have had similiar policies. Colt was the original manufacturer of the Thompson and may have not liked the infamous publicity that the press promoted.

[mike in co]

This is not total known fact but my understanding is that Colt being the maker of the military full autos and at the time being the only maker of civilian AR's the gov. was afraid that it would be too easy to make full autos at home with available parts. The Gov had Colt make the civilian versions with larger pin to prevent swapping parts and prevent upper swapping by using a larger offset pivit pin for the upper and lower joint. Later they made the raised lower shelf to prevent the use of a drop in auto sear or lightning link and all along the Gov more or less made Colt employ a Gov agent to oversee the assembly of Colt weapons to make sure they were following the Gov regulations.
The gun control act of 1968 was for serial numbers and paper trail, the Gov made a law that said no new transferable machine guns could be made after 1986.



you are right.....THIS (STATEMENT) IS NOT A FACT....PERIOD.

[mike in co]

Colt was the original manufacturer of the Thompson and may have not liked the infamous publicity that the press promoted.


AS USUUAL....LITTLE FACT LOTS OF BS

auto ordinace was the ORIGINAL maker of the thompson.......


mike in co

[danski26]

Thanks for the relpies guys.

Mike in Co,

Does Federal law prohibit the sale of select fire weapons to civilans in the United States manufactured after a certain date? 1968? 1986?

[Mike Venturino]

Its not that civilians have not been able to buy full autos since 1986. Its that if the full auto was not "in the system" by 1986 then it cannot be transferred to a civilian. "By in the system" means it was already in the hands of a civilian by means of a Form 4 before 1986 then it can be transferred legally. I bought 6 in 2008.

Auto-Ordnance was the original company but Colt made the first 15,000 Thompsons starting with the Model 1921. They are clearly marked by Colt.

Worthy of note is that they were poor sellers and all did not get sold until 1939. Auto-Ordance built a manufacturing facility in Bridgeport, CT during WW2. Savage made more Thompsons than any other factory.
]
MLV

[lead-1]

mike in co, when did Colt try to sell out the gun owners, was it back in the 60's or later in the 80's? Also did it have anything to do with Colt losing the contract for the 1911 pistols, I'm sure Colt could have built a 1911 in 9mm that would have been just as reliable as the 45 acp had been for many years. I'm sorry, getting into politics and off topic but I'm curious.

[danski26]

Thanks for the info Mike.....so if a select fire was not "in the system" by 1986 then it could not be sold to a civilian.

Mike in CO,

So you are saying you are mad at Colt for changing the specs on an ar-15 made after 1986 so it was more difficult to convert to select fire OR are you saying that Colt was responsible for making it illegal for select fires not "in the system" before 1986 to be sold to civilians? Maybe both????

[Mike Venturino]

danski26: You are correct. If the select fire wasn't in the system before 1986 then it ain't never going to get in the system - unless they have another amnesty like the one in '68. One of the six I bought had amnesty paperwork with it.

Here's a for-instance. The local sheriff is a friend and he was telling me recently that the department found a full auto/select fire in the arms room but can't find a shred of paperwork for it. They called the ATF and the reply was, "You can keep it or you can torch it and send us the pieces."

MLV

[danski26]

I hear ya mike, you might cry if you come into my armory...........

[mike in co]

mike in co, when did Colt try to sell out the gun owners, was it back in the 60's or later in the 80's? Also did it have anything to do with Colt losing the contract for the 1911 pistols, I'm sure Colt could have built a 1911 in 9mm that would have been just as reliable as the 45 acp had been for many years. I'm sorry, getting into politics and off topic but I'm curious.

in the late 80's and while loosing the 1911 to the beretta, the discussion is/was all about the ar/m16 family.

mike in co

[lead-1]

in the late 80's and while loosing the 1911 to the beretta, the discussion is/was all about the ar/m16 family.

mike in co


Yes, I know discussion is about AR/M16's, that is why I said sorry to get off topic but I was curious. I didn't want to open a second can of worms but am interested in your opinion on this matter and am listening to what you have to say as well as others.

[danski26]

Mike in CO.....I asked you a question in hopes of clarifying your posistion. Will you please answer the question?

"Mike in CO,

So you are saying you are mad at Colt for changing the specs on an ar-15 made after 1986 so it was more difficult to convert to select fire OR are you saying that Colt was responsible for making it illegal for select fires not "in the system" before 1986 to be sold to civilians? Maybe both????"

[mike in co]

Mike in CO.....I asked you a question in hopes of clarifying your posistion. Will you please answer the question?

"Mike in CO,

So you are saying you are mad at Colt for changing the specs on an ar-15 made after 1986 so it was more difficult to convert to select fire OR are you saying that Colt was responsible for making it illegal for select fires not "in the system" before 1986 to be sold to civilians? Maybe both????"

i'm not mad at colt. i am disgusted with any firearms company in the unites states, doing business with the us government, making guns used to defend our constitution, that would lower themselves , giving away my rights under that constitition, for the all mighty dollar. it was a political move to gain favor with the politicians, an attempt to keep building guns under contracts, contracts they were loosing to other companies....yes the 1911 was history, and now they were loosing contracts to other companies( fn i believe).

neither question is correct.

go read my earlier statements.


mike in co

[danski26]

Ok Mike in CO, I went back to the other thread and reread the posts there. I still do not understand what you are saying.

Your not upset with Colt about the changes to the design that they made?

You don't think that Colt was somehow responsible in the federal law that prohibites select fires being sold to civilians?

"giving away my rights under that constitition, for the all mighty dollar."

What rights were given away? How was Colt responsible for those rights being given away?

[StarMetal]

i'm not mad at colt. i am disgusted with any firearms company in the unites states, doing business with the us government, making guns used to defend our constitution, that would lower themselves , giving away my rights under that constitition, for the all mighty dollar. it was a political move to gain favor with the politicians, an attempt to keep building guns under contracts, contracts they were loosing to other companies....yes the 1911 was history, and now they were loosing contracts to other companies( fn i believe).

neither question is correct.

go read my earlier statements.


mike in co

Mike,

There's no proof of that. There was a time when Colt couldn't keep up with making M16's. All this is about ambiguous as the M14 was chosen over the FAL FN when the FAL beat the M14 in the trial....political?

I believe Colt changed the lower receiver walls to combat the use of all the auto trip devices out there that work tripping the disconnect. In fact you can make one of those from a good quality piece of strip of steel. I've seen them. You can make them with hand tools.

Joe

[danski26]

And then there was silence...........

[StarMetal]

Mike,

Back again after doing some research. If you would look at AR15 lower receiver, looking down into the inside of it, you will notice a shelf or ledge right behind the selector heading towards the buttstock. Okay, on pre ban rifles this ledge is just below the top of the selector switch. On these type of receivers one can use, illegally, the homemade disconnector trips. Now post ban that shelf or ledge is higher then the selector which precludes any use of the homemade disonnector switch. My point being is my friend and I have been looking at are pre and post ban Colts and other brands of AR15 lowers and all of the post bans have a raised shelf or ledge so you can't use a homemade trip. I just compared my pre ban Colt and post Stag Arms receivers. My friend is right and he says you're wrong that only Colt caved in, they all did.

Joe