Select-fire M4 legality question

[faithmyeyes]

Are there any circumstances whatsoever in which a person who (as far as I know) is neither an SOT nor an LE/soldier on active duty might legally possess a military-issue select-fire M4?

[The Cat]

Standard individual citizen - no. No M4's were made before May 1986.

[faithmyeyes]

That's my understanding as well, but I'm curious if there are any special cases.

I've encountered a person who claims to have one, and believes that his possession is perfectly legal. He's either lying, mis-informed, or a special case I don't know about.

I'll soon know whether he actually has the weapon or not. But if I can't figure out why it's legal for him to possess it, I'm concerned. I'm not interested in getting him in trouble, but I do want to make sure I'm not anywhere around if it happens.

[QuietShootr]

My vote is for liar or tard, in that order.

There was a guy who works at the local Lowe's who was always spinning bullshit stories to customers about his .50 sniper rifle the Army let him keep when he got out and how he has to let the Feds inspect paperwork on it every year..blah.blah.blah. I got a FLEO buddy to go in and flash his creds and ask Mr. Commando to see his paperwork.

"Er..Ah...Um, you must have the wrong guy!"

[bkb0000]

this is common... people who don't know gun laws, and think nobody else does either... so they make up some bullcrap about "special federal permits," and similar. i'm so glad i don't ever have to be exposed to these idiots anymore.

if a person possesses a select-fire firearm, it was either manufactured before the ban in '86, they have an SOT, have sworn an oath to uphold and defend and are still on active duty and presently engaged in duties requiring said possession, or are a felon. there are no other exceptions, "permits," "licenses," etc.

[Renegade]

Are there any circumstances whatsoever in which a person who (as far as I know) is neither an SOT nor an LE/soldier on active duty might legally possess a military-issue select-fire M4?

Sure, but it would not be the norm and said person would not be talking about it.

[markm]

Military Issue? NO, unless he's a foreign dignitary or some such. Just stay away from the guy. He's probably full of shit... but who cares... nothing to be gained by being a rat bastard.

Live and let live.... if he gets popped for a stolen M4, that's his problem.

[Renegade]

That's my understanding as well, but I'm curious if there are any special cases.

I've encountered a person who claims to have one, and believes that his possession is perfectly legal. He's either lying, mis-informed, or a special case I don't know about.

I'll soon know whether he actually has the weapon or not. But if I can't figure out why it's legal for him to possess it, I'm concerned. I'm not interested in getting him in trouble, but I do want to make sure I'm not anywhere around if it happens.

He is lying.

Folks who have these things have no problem explaining why it is legal, for example, I have a Glock 18C. How? I am 07/02. See how easy that is?

[The Cat]

I've encountered a person who claims to have one, and believes that his possession is perfectly legal. He's either lying, mis-informed, or a special case I don't know about.

I'll soon know whether he actually has the weapon or not. But if I can't figure out why it's legal for him to possess it, I'm concerned. I'm not interested in getting him in trouble, but I do want to make sure I'm not anywhere around if it happens.

If for some reason he's actually not full of shit, and he does happen to have a select-fire honest-to-God M4 that he got illegally, he is stupid to the point of being clinically retarded to actually be be bragging about having one to people.




My vote is for liar or tard, in that order.

There was a guy who works at the local Lowe's who was always spinning bullshit stories to customers about his .50 sniper rifle the Army let him keep when he got out and how he has to let the Feds inspect paperwork on it every year..blah.blah.blah. I got a FLEO buddy to go in and flash his creds and ask Mr. Commando to see his paperwork.

"Er..Ah...Um, you must have the wrong guy!"

There was a guy at a local flea market that had an old AR-15 A1 for sale.

Me: "Mind if I check it out?"

Dude: "Nope. Help yourself."

I flipped the safety, and noticed it went to three positions. I pushed the rear pin in and opened it up. Mrs Cat smiled knowingly. I noticed all M16 parts in it, but no auto sear or hole. Rollmark said PWA. :blink:

Dude: "You know what you're looking at there, son?"

Me: "I know exactly what I'm looking at."

Dude: "That's my old M16 I carried in 'Nam. I have to sell it to put my kid in school." (He looked to be about my age, and I'm a '68 model.)

Me: "..."

Dude: "Well? What do you think?"

Me: "I think you're going to need some soap on a rope."

We walked away.


To be fair, in the mid '80s when that particular gun was made, it was pretty common to see all-M16 parts in an AR. My problem is, I'm allergic to bullshit.

I don't see why people can't just man the **** up and quit outright lying, like the OP's acquaintance most likely is. Reality's a hell of a lot more interesting anyway.

ETA: +1 on what MarkM said!

[QuietShootr]

Reality's a hell of a lot more interesting anyway.



Not for most people.

[Whootsinator]

It's perfectly possible for the man in question to be more guilty of ignorance than of intentionally lying. If the average Joe were to see a fully-automatic M16 in an M4 configuration, he'd probably call it an M4. The people who obtain NFA firearms aren't inherently knowledgeable. He could have inherited the weapon, or just has enough money to throw at things he wants without researching them.

[Iraqgunz]

Tell him to Google David Olofson. This has been addressed and answered.