PDA

View Full Version : US opposes Seoulís bid to sell old rifles to US gun collectors.


wkd4496
08-13-2010, 12:31 PM
The story was posted in another part of the forum here:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=331186

drbob
08-13-2010, 12:36 PM
Before knowing anything else, my first suspicion is that these "problems" are completely imaginary: They are necessary lies dreamed up in order to keep our current administration's "guns = bad" bias satiated.

BluNorthern
08-13-2010, 12:40 PM
I WANT ONE!!!!!!!

CSDGuy
08-13-2010, 12:41 PM
Gotta say it: :dupe: I started a thread on this exact topic yesterday. It's in the C&R/Black Powder Section.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=331186

Glock22Fan
08-13-2010, 12:45 PM
seems to me that there would be more potential for problems is we DON'T buy them back. Then they would be looking for other purchasers, and who knows who would bid, maybe Mogadishu war lords or something.

Surely there's some company that would be prepared to buy them in bulk, run them through some kind of QC and then advertise them, much as if someone had discovered a cache of old Mausers somewhere?

yellowfin
08-13-2010, 12:45 PM
Bingo, this is nothing other than screw the gun owners. There is ZERO reason not to want us to buy them other than that. Pure malice.

thayne
08-13-2010, 1:27 PM
seems to me that there would be more potential for problems is we DON'T buy them back. Then they would be looking for other purchasers, and who knows who would bid, maybe Mogadishu war lords or something.

Surely there's some company that would be prepared to buy them in bulk, run them through some kind of QC and then advertise them, much as if someone had discovered a cache of old Mausers somewhere?

CMP?

jdberger
08-13-2010, 1:56 PM
:rolleyes:

Read the other thread, ya reactionaries....

Simply put, the US is not going to allow Korea to sell rifles that were lent to them.

Meplat
08-13-2010, 2:06 PM
Then ask for their return and parcel them out through CMP or other outlets and put the money back in the defense budget or toward the national debt. This administration will never do anything like that. It makes too much economic and liberty sense. We reactionaries know the tricks, nice try.


:rolleyes:

:pRead the other thread, ya reactionaries....

Simply put, the US is not going to allow Korea to sell rifles that were lent to them.

FirstFlight
08-13-2010, 2:17 PM
OK guys, this is the way its going to be. The old MFs who were in the military when the M-1 was issue will get first chance for one of the 100K guns. Of course to show proof of enlistment during that time, and be first in line, it will be necessary to show documentation such as a DD-214. So we can all experience the beauty of these rifles, when us old MFs die our widows will sell them to you young MFs. How does that sound?

Kyle1886
08-13-2010, 2:33 PM
FirstFlight, I have my DD-214 right here. The M-1 is the only rifle I had in the Corps, so I qualify,---soooo, where does the line start?

Kyle

dadoody
08-13-2010, 2:35 PM
Those mother effers....

jdberger
08-13-2010, 3:07 PM
Then ask for their return and parcel them out through CMP or other outlets and put the money back in the defense budget or toward the national debt. This administration will never do anything like that. It makes too much economic and liberty sense. We reactionaries know the tricks, nice try.

The Koreans insist that they own them. They won't return the rifles. Because the US insists that it still owns the rifles, they aren't going to let the Koreans sell the rifles in the US - because that would be helping the exact people who have just stolen the rifles from the US.

Make more sense?

From Orest, COO at the CMP:

The rumors, reports, articles about Korea have been circulating for at least five years. A few months ago a Korean newspaper once again reported that they would selling Garands and carbines to a US importer. The CMP is not a firearms importer and we do not have any involvement of any kind in anything that may happen with these Korean rifles and carbines.

The only way any rifle or carbine from any country can find its way to the CMP is if the country returns loaned rifles back to the US Army. When that happens, the CMP "may" possibly receive some of those rifles. According to the recent articles, Korea will not be returning anything to the US Army, but will be "selling" these rifles to an importer. If, in fact, these rifles are sold to an importer, the CMP will not see even one of them. We do not have any additional information on this subject. Thanks for understanding.

Now - I'm not that great with math, but I'm pretty sure that Obama wasn't President of the US 5 years ago. I do know that 5 years ago, the Greeks and Germans gave a buttload of lent rifles back to the US Army. I even bought a couple. Again, the reason that none of them came from Korea is the dispute over who actually owns them.

This isn't an Obama thing.

It's an ownership thing.

Roadrunner
08-13-2010, 4:20 PM
Oh man, I'd love to get my hands on those for only 400.00. That would be awesome.

diginit
08-13-2010, 6:29 PM
It seems Korea is doing anything it can to p*ss us off.
Here we go again. IMO, Although I hate to say, We should have continued that Police Action through '69 till the end. Even if we lost, At least we would have seen it through...Not just given up and pulled out. Now they see our nation as weak and think they can push us around. And with all the troops we have overseas, They actually have the upper hand. KEEP YOUR RTBA! No matter what. Either that or learn a foreign language.

donger
08-13-2010, 6:32 PM
It seems Korea is doing anything it can to p*ss us off.
Here we go again. IMO, Although I hate to say, We should have continued that Police Action through '69 till the end. Even if we lost, At least we would have seen it through...Not just given up and pulled out. Now they see our nation as weak and think they can push us around. And with all the troops we have overseas, They actually have the upper hand. KEEP YOUR RTBA! No matter what. Either that or learn a foreign language.

Huh? I think you may have your wars confused.

diginit
08-13-2010, 6:39 PM
Huh? I think you may have your wars confused.
You're right. Korea ended in 1953 with an agreement. right? That's when N and S split. My Bad. Guess I'm not smarter than a fifth grader....
Either way. I still feel the same. Quitting is not an option...And any involvement with N. Korea will most likely involve China also. The only good thing is that Russia won't be involved.

jl123
08-13-2010, 7:03 PM
You're right. Korea ended in 1953 with an agreement. right? That's when N and S split. My Bad. Guess I'm not smarter than a fifth grader....
Either way. I still feel the same. Quitting is not an option...And any involvement with N. Korea will most likely involve China also. The only good thing is that Russia won't be involved.

:confused:

Vox
08-13-2010, 7:37 PM
You're right. Korea ended in 1953 with an agreement. right? That's when N and S split. My Bad. Guess I'm not smarter than a fifth grader....
Either way. I still feel the same. Quitting is not an option...And any involvement with N. Korea will most likely involve China also. The only good thing is that Russia won't be involved.

Actually Korea was split by the Allies after world war II as agreed (by the allies not the Koreans) at the Potsdam Conference. The DPRK then invaded the Republic of Korea and we fought a war to maintain Republic of Korea's independence. We did that. Although some with we could have gone all the way north and made Kores united under one flag and democracy, that would have violated the Potsdam agreement... not that that's worth a dam...I'm not sure it'd have mattered if Russia were involved. The Chinese were involved heavily, same stink different flag then.

Roadrunner
08-13-2010, 7:44 PM
Actually Korea was split by the Allies after world war II as agreed (by the allies not the Koreans) at the Potsdam Conference. The DPRK then invaded the Republic of Korea and we fought a war to maintain Republic of Korea's independence. We did that. Although some with we could have gone all the way north and made Kores united under one flag and democracy, that would have violated the Potsdam agreement... not that that's worth a dam...I'm not sure it'd have mattered if Russia were involved. The Chinese were involved heavily, same stink different flag then.

We actually drove the North Koreans well past the 38th parallel and kept pushing North. The Chinese got involved when they thought we were going to push into China. At that point we withdrew to the 38th parallel and that's where Pan Mun Jom is today.

Meplat
08-13-2010, 10:46 PM
Obama is the boss RIGHT NOW and he was the boss 'a few months ago', This IS an Obama thing and it's not an ownership thing it's an anti-gun thing.

Bush is gone, you need to start thinking up other excuses or lose your credibility.


The Koreans insist that they own them. They won't return the rifles. Because the US insists that it still owns the rifles, they aren't going to let the Koreans sell the rifles in the US - because that would be helping the exact people who have just stolen the rifles from the US.

Make more sense?

From Orest, COO at the CMP:



Now - I'm not that great with math, but I'm pretty sure that Obama wasn't President of the US 5 years ago. I do know that 5 years ago, the Greeks and Germans gave a buttload of lent rifles back to the US Army. I even bought a couple. Again, the reason that none of them came from Korea is the dispute over who actually owns them.

This isn't an Obama thing.

It's an ownership thing.

Meplat
08-13-2010, 11:06 PM
You do know that there is a North and a South Korea right? And we are still IN South Korea?


It seems Korea is doing anything it can to p*ss us off.
Here we go again. IMO, Although I hate to say, We should have continued that Police Action through '69 till the end. Even if we lost, At least we would have seen it through...Not just given up and pulled out. Now they see our nation as weak and think they can push us around. And with all the troops we have overseas, They actually have the upper hand. KEEP YOUR RTBA! No matter what. Either that or learn a foreign language.

Meplat
08-13-2010, 11:10 PM
Why not? Russia was involved the first time.



You're right. Korea ended in 1953 with an agreement. right? That's when N and S split. My Bad. Guess I'm not smarter than a fifth grader....
Either way. I still feel the same. Quitting is not an option...And any involvement with N. Korea will most likely involve China also. The only good thing is that Russia won't be involved.

Meplat
08-13-2010, 11:20 PM
We actually drove the North Koreans well past the 38th parallel and kept pushing North. The Chinese got involved when they thought we were going to push into China. At that point we withdrew to the 38th parallel and that's where Pan Mun Jom is today.


No, They thought we were going to completely overrun North Korea and reunite the two which would have deprived them of their buffer client state. Which was a very real possibility. They knew very well we would not invade China.

jdberger
08-14-2010, 12:23 AM
Obama is the boss RIGHT NOW and he was the boss 'a few months ago', This IS an Obama thing and it's not an ownership thing it's an anti-gun thing.
Bush is gone, you need to start thinking up other excuses or lose your credibility.

And your proof is....what?

A third hand account by an anonymous official citing ambiguity?

The problems the U.S. government cited were somewhat ambiguous, said an official at the Ministry of National Defense on condition of anonymity.



You (:TFH:) were impugning my credibility? :rolleyes:

I'm no fan of Obama - but this compulsion to blame him for every little thing is ridiculous - and it makes the opposition look like a bunch of nutters. There's plenty of big stuff to dislike him for without having to delve into the realm of wack-a-doo conspiracy theories, no?

YMMV

Hopi
08-14-2010, 7:38 AM
I'm no fan of Obama - but this compulsion to blame him for every little thing is ridiculous - and it makes the opposition look like a bunch of nutters. There's plenty of big stuff to dislike him for without having to delve into the realm of wack-a-doo conspiracy theories, no?

YMMV


Somebody needs to print this onto a flyer and post it in the loony-bin as a reminder to those whom are shuffling down to the computer lab for recess.

motorhead
08-14-2010, 10:30 AM
iirc those were destined for CMP. i heard about the possibility late last year. i had a feeling the change in administration might torpedo it. what's the difference between an italian garand and a korean one?

Meplat
08-14-2010, 12:15 PM
You want me to prove that Obama is in charge of the executive now and has been for over a year and a half?:rolleyes:

And your proof is....what?

A third hand account by an anonymous official citing ambiguity?



You (:TFH:) were impugning my credibility? :rolleyes:

No, just trying to warn you against damaging it yourself.

I'm no fan of Obama - but this compulsion to blame him for every little thing is ridiculous - : I can truthfully say the same about Bush. I was not a fan, but this guy is sure no improvement. And the fact remains that he could set this straight with a five minute phone call. Ownership is a bull scat red herring and if you dispute that you farther endanger your own credibility. and it makes the opposition look like a bunch of nutters. There's plenty of big stuff to dislike him for without having to delve into the realm of wack-a-doo conspiracy theories, no?

YMMV

dustoff31
08-14-2010, 12:28 PM
Obama is the boss RIGHT NOW and he was the boss 'a few months ago', This IS an Obama thing and it's not an ownership thing it's an anti-gun thing.

Bush is gone, you need to start thinking up other excuses or lose your credibility.


+1.

Obama didn't create this situation with the Korean guns. But he could certainly fix it if he wanted too.

fredieusa
08-14-2010, 12:38 PM
Its economic mostly -

Why would the Govt want US currency draining abroad when they can handle it with bureaucratic objections.

Why will anyone want the public to spend only $300 on something that takes $1000 to manufacture today?

Why will the US manufacturers (big chunk of gun lobby) not oppose this? There is only so much money the gun collectors have. if the gunnies buy $300 Garand so who will buy their new $1500 rifles? They dont get to see a nickel, even if they did they still loose too much on their current production.

Its not hard to figure out that the interest of the public, the manufacturers, importers and the gun rights groups (NRA/GOA and all) are not the same on various levels. You will be surprised how things are motivated by the pure economics of it.

Milsurp Collector
08-14-2010, 12:45 PM
iirc those were destined for CMP. i heard about the possibility late last year. i had a feeling the change in administration might torpedo it. what's the difference between an italian garand and a korean one?

They were never destined for the CMP. When the news first came out about these Korean rifles Orest Michaels at the CMP said that they were not coming to the CMP http://www.thecmp.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3319. The ex-Italian (and ex-Greek) rifles that the CMP has distributed the past couple of years were loaned to those countries. Some of the Korean rifles were sold or given to the Koreans.

Aleksei Vasiliev
08-14-2010, 3:24 PM
:rolleyes:

Read the other thread, ya reactionaries....

Simply put, the US is not going to allow Korea to sell rifles that were lent to them.South Korea (and I believe one? other country) have no obligation to give their rifles back. They got them under an early agreement that makes it completely fine for them to sell the rifles back to the US or to whoever else they want. If we don't buy them, they could reasonably sell them off to anyone who wants them.

Meplat
08-14-2010, 4:54 PM
Its economic mostly -

Why would the Govt want US currency draining abroad when they can handle it with bureaucratic objections.


The US government loves US currency going abroad. Just ask China! And in international finance the amount of money involved here is like a gnat on a bulls but. The US supports the South Korean military to start with, this can only help. And why not let Americans have the benifit, when they will just go elswhere if we keep them out.


Why will anyone want the public to spend only $300 on something that takes $1000 to manufacture today?


The same reason we buy beat up used cars and other durable goods. It is better to get all the use out of a thing than to waist energy and resources building a new one, on a number of levels.


Why will the US manufacturers (big chunk of gun lobby) not oppose this? There is only so much money the gun collectors have. if the gunnies buy $300 Garand so who will buy their new $1500 rifles? They dont get to see a nickel, even if they did they still loose too much on their current production.

The same reason they have not fought the sale of surplus military rifles for a century. It's a gatway drug :D you attract youngsters and newbes with inexpenisive Garands and carbins and next thing you know they are buying your expensive M1-As Mini-14s and ARs, pluss accessories, ammo, and on it goes.

Its not hard to figure out that the interest of the public, the manufacturers, importers and the gun rights groups (NRA/GOA and all) are not the same on various levels. You will be surprised how things are motivated by the pure economics of it.

So how come the shooting industry is just now coming to it's economic senses after 100 years?

There are only two logical explanations for this, those responsible are either anti-gun, or the proper grifters have not yet been greased.

Nihonto Chicken
08-14-2010, 8:39 PM
If we don't buy them, they could reasonably sell them off to anyone who wants them.

And who would they be, in any significant numbers? With the cutoff of the USA collector market, the time averaged value of those Garands goes down by a factor of two or three, maybe more. Without the US market for the intact arms, rather than sell a few of them every now and then for maybe $2000 a crack to some weirdo collectors in Norway (just an example, no offense!:o), it would be more time/cost effective to break them down and pitch the receivers, and sell the remaining parts to US enthusiasts, if one wanted to make a profit in his/her own lifetime. JMHO.

Sudaev
08-14-2010, 10:45 PM
I doubt the Blue Sky weapons were "given" back.

jdberger
08-15-2010, 12:42 AM
I doubt the Blue Sky weapons were "given" back.

They weren't.

They were demilled and sold. One guy took a torch (or saw) to the reciever. Another tossed the halves in a box (sound familiar?).

Meplat
08-15-2010, 3:43 PM
They weren't.

They were demilled and sold. One guy took a torch (or saw) to the reciever. Another tossed the halves in a box (sound familiar?).

How did they then get sold in tact? Some part of your statement must not be complete. I have seen in tact specimens. Never bought one myself but know guys who have them. Most were rough but not demiled. Enlighten me with the rest of the story?:confused:

nick
08-15-2010, 3:59 PM
iirc those were destined for CMP. i heard about the possibility late last year. i had a feeling the change in administration might torpedo it. what's the difference between an italian garand and a korean one?

A Korean Garand likely saw a lot of action, and may or may not have been rebuilt after that. The only action an Italian Garand likely saw was in WWII when it was shooting at, among others, Italians, and it was likely rebuilt after that :)

Well, that, and it looks like there're questions as to the ownership of the Garands in Korea, while it was clearcut with the Italian ones (they didn't own them).