See, thing that really screws it up, when was the last time Colt was a contract source for the M16s?
M4s, yes, but I was under the impression that FN was the main contractor for M16s. Is there a special consideration made with M16 A3s? If the M16 A3 is a cosmetic duplicate to the M16 A2, I could see where they'd come from FN only with a special trigger pack. If they are a flattop and cosmetically identical to the M16 A4, I don't know what to believe really(though I don't believe that it's the case that the A3 is a flattop).
What I do know is this, Colt long ago bought the trademarks to the AR15 name from Armalite. It's become a long standing tradition to associate "AR15" or "M16" with the Colt name. For the most part, the guns on the Colt law enforcement page could be type classed anything they wanted to for the purpose of civilian sale.
But not all of Colt's rifles are fitting with what the gov't. or military calls for in their specifications. An M16 A2 must meet a defined set of criteria before it will be considered an "M16 A2" by the military. Change the trigger group and it's likely the military changes the variation/classification to fit the new gun, M16 A2 to M16 A3 with new trigger group.
For civilian sales though, Colt can get away with calling both a "safe, semi, full" and a "safe, semi, burst" M16 an A2 variant simply because they are cosmetically identical. Same applies to the A3s that they sell. Civilian sales or variant designations don't have to follow military form, though they sure do like to try.
As for Janes, anyone else here think that Janes is wrong?