The Obama M1 rifle meltdown?

[doc03]

Someone this morning said you know what that SOB Obama did now? He said he got an e-mail from a senator no doubt a Rethug saying that South Korea had nearly 1 million pristine M1 rifles they wanted to sell the USA and Obama had them all destroyed. I told the guy I bet it was another NRA lie. I have searched Fact Check and Politifact and so far found nothing. I did google the subject and according to that search the e-mail was sent out by Rand Paul. Anyoned know the facts about this?

[Brickbat]

1. Here's a story from about a year ago (sorry about the Fox News link).

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/01/obama-administration-reverses-course-forbids-sale-antique-m-rifles/

ETA: Here's a clip.

The South Korean government, in an effort to raise money for its military, wants to sell nearly a million antique M1 rifles that were used by U.S. soldiers in the Korean War to gun collectors in America.

The Obama administration approved the sale of the American-made rifles last year (2009). But it reversed course and banned the sale in March (2010) -– a decision that went largely unnoticed at the time but that is now sparking opposition from gun rights advocates.

A State Department spokesman said the administration's decision was based on concerns that the guns could fall into the wrong hands.

"The transfer of such a large number of weapons -- 87,310 M1 Garands and 770,160 M1 Carbines -- could potentially be exploited by individuals seeking firearms for illicit purposes," the spokesman told FoxNews.com. "We are working closely with our Korean allies and the U.S. Army in exploring alternative options to dispose of these firearms."

[doc03]

13. LOL I ask for facts and I get a link to Fox, the world

is coming to an end. The clip never does say what the final decision was or what ever happened to the riles though. Thanks anyway.

[Brickbat]

16. Yeah, I haven't been able to find any later story.

[TheWraith]

57. I thought the Senate passed an exception to allow their reimportation...

... but if they did, I can't find a link to it on Google through the morass of right-wing bullshit if you Google "m1 korea reimportation."

[spin]

37. When discussing any story involving gun control ...

it's unfortunately hard to come up sources that are not ultra-conservative to support an argument that is not in favor of those who support strong gun legislation and control.

If you were limited to using sources similar to Fox News, you would face the same conundrum attempting to support the liberal and progressive polices of the Democratic Party.

Basically although we have access to an amazing amount of sources most are biased in one way or another. Finding the truth about any subject is extremely difficult and challenging.

[Bandit]

42. The Carbines are very easily converted into M-2s

The conversion kits are readily available...The M-2 Carbine is a pretty neat weapon except for the jamming problems..

[sofa king]

79. I heard a story about that once.

I wonder if you can offer some insight.

Apparently there was another way to convert an M1A1, which could be done by enterprising soldiers, which made the carbine much more than fully automatic. Filing down a particular piece made it so that a single trigger pull would empty the clip.

A Marine veteran of Iwo Jima once told my father that he had done this. The idea was to hold the spray-gun around the corner of a cave entrance and hose down the defenders while another Marine exposed himself to toss in a satchel charge to seal the entrance. Hopefully, the volume of fire would keep the Japanese defenders' heads down long enough to prevent them from tossing the charge back before it could be detonated.

Instead, upon pulling the trigger the Marine lost control of the carbine, which instantly flipped over and sent the Marines outside of the cave diving for cover. That was, he told my old man, the last time they tried that.

What do you think? Feasible, or crap?

[-..__...]

84. Possible...

but without knowing more about the fire control group of an M1 carbine, it's hard to say.

From the description, it sounds like the rifle was altered to produce a "slam fire"... not a safe or desirable situation whether intentional or accidental.

It can result in the firearm firing out of battery (round going off before the bolt is fully seated), our in a runaway (as described by the OP)

The effect can be achieved in any number of semi-automatic weapons simply by filing a part or two down, however, doing so is not only dangerous (to the shooter that is), but also highly illegal.

The ATF takes it seriously enough that even in proven cases where it was accidental (worn or defective parts, soft primers in ammo, etc), the person was still charged with illegal possession of a fully automatic firearm.

[sofa king]

93. Thank you for your reply.

One thing that amuses me about fully automatic weapons is that armies generally don't want them, either. Certain German units in World War II had many times the firepower of equivalent units they were fighting (Stephen Ambrose makes the comparison between German paratroopers and American paratroopers, for example, who faced one another in Normandy).

But the Germans also had a horse-and-wagon logistics system which could not possibly supply the amount of ammunition the falschirmjager could consume. So the Germans devoted a lot of their training and theory to the idea of fire discipline--reducing the volume of fire until the critical times when heavy volume was useful--and that rarely worked in practice. (They also killed Americans at a ratio of two to one, but there are many other factors such as level of training, quality of field officers, motivation, and so on, so firepower is not the single explanation for that.)

I think that's why most automatic weapons eventually incorporate a fire select option at some point in their design lifetimes.

It also raises in my mind the silly observation that fully automatic weapons may actually be safer, in the sense that a rampaging shooter has a much lower chance of hitting anything, has to reload more than they can shoot, and cannot carry the volume of bullets that could be fired by the gun in theory. Terrible argument.

[Bandit]

95. When I was in the Nam M-2 Carbines were everywhere

It was the weapon ARVN soldiers carried. There were plenty of M-1 Carbines around as well and the conversion kits were everywhere..

[michreject]

85. Both guns were halted

Garand:



30 cal carbine:

[Orsino]

102. So, about as fictional as the story about the M-5.

"This...unit...must...lie."

[Scuba]

2. Last time I heard this story it was Bill Clinton who had them destroyed. n/t

[-..__...]

17. Those were M14's

Too bad to.

From what I understand, the M14 with it's 7.62x51mm cartridge is preferred over the M16/M4 with it's 5.56mm cartridge by Special Forces units in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[Scuba]

35. The M14 is much lighter and has way less recoil. I'm still waiting for a credible source. n/t

[-..__...]

55. I was referring to the destruction/demilling of stockplied M14's

under Clinton... not M1 Garands.

[bigtree]

3. it doesn't have to be true to have an impact

just repeated often enough -- here and elsewhere

[WilliamPitt]

4. M1?

They're a little out of date. What's the big deal about destroying them? The US military always junks the stuff it leaves behind, so they can buy more on our dime. I'm actually astonished there are that many M1s left anywhere. They're museum pieces.

[AngryAmish]

5. I'm not a gun guy but I know some people love these things

Told they make an excellent hunting rifle. But the gun folks know waaaayyy more than I do.

[WilliamPitt]

6. I'm sure it is

It won WWII on two fronts.

[aikoaiko]

8. Like old buildings, there is a movement to not destroy fireams -- esp those with historic value.

Like you wrote, the M1 helped win WWII on two fronts.

[-..__...]

19. "The greatest battle implement ever devised"

-- General George S. Patton

[LanternWaste]

52. In effect, Patton was marginally more successful than Freidendall.

Patton - leader, developerof the unmitigated disaster of the Vosges campaign, and risked a task force to save his son-in-law.

His opinions on what may or may not be the greatest battle implement falls far short of the opinions of Clark, Bradley, etc...

In effect, Patton was marginally more successful than Freidendall.

[Spider Jerusalem]

44. One front

the Pacific...but a lot of the Marines in '42, '43 in the Pacific Theatre of Operations were still using '03 Springfields (and the Soviets won the war in Europe; the Americans and British just made things a little easier by making Hitler fight on two fronts).

[LanternWaste]

53. "Victory was bought with American Spam, and paid for with Russian blood."

"and the Soviets won the war in Europe; the Americans and British just made things a little easier by making Hitler fight on two fronts..."


"Victory was bought with American Spam, and paid for with Russian blood." Zhukov

[krispos42]

9. The Civilian Marksmenship Program sells M1 Garands (your picture)

and M-1 Carbines to anybody who's former military, or in a target shooting club, for about $600. Formally a government entity, it inherited hundreds of thousands of surplus rifles when they were no longer needed, even as reserves.

If South Korea has a million of either, there is a definite demand for them in the US. At $600 each, they're worth several F-22 Raptors, and would be snapped up quickly. A beat-up Garand with mix-and-match parts sells on on the market for a grand or more. Check out gunbroker.com.

Destroying them would be an absolute historical, financial, and ecological tragedy.

[doc03]

15. Agreed n/t

[WilliamPitt]

26. Fair enough

Not a gun owner or hunter, but definitely an appreciator of history...and my friends who hunt would probably love to get their hands on one of these.

[alfredo]

34. It will increase the value of existing M1's. When I was overseas

the local police had M-16's, we had M1's with Korean war vintage ammo.

[Hangingon]

39. Last I checked, those were Turkish returns.

[Edweird]

11. Dude! 'Out of date'? No way! The M1A is awesome.

[Pigheaded]

22. Not M1As

Either M1 rifles

Or M1 carbines.

None of which should be destroyed!

M1A is a trademarked name of the commercial Springfield Armory.

PH

[Xithras]

45. I own two Garands

They're remarkable not only for their accuracy, durability, and ability to eat thumbs, but because it was one of the more beautiful rifles that our military ever fielded. They also aren't "museum pieces" by any stretch. I, and most Garand owners that I've met, still fire them regularly.

[WilliamPitt]

50. By museum pieces

I was referring to their tall place in history.

[neverforget]

88. Lucky you! I would love to own an M1 Garand.

Damn fine rifle.

[Xithras]

89. I got my first through the CMP.

I was volunteering as an assistant scoutmaster with the BSA at the time, which was sufficient to qualify for the purchase. Back then you could buy a field grade rifle for about $250-$300 (I think they're about $500 to $700 nowadays).

They are great rifles, without question. Owning a bit of American history is also immeasurably cool. While no records existed for my first, my second has been traced to WW2 Europe. My rifle actually shot at real Nazi's, once upon a time. How neat is that?

Just mind the thumb :)

[TheWraith]

56. What's the big deal? They're antiques, and amazing pieces of history.

These are the rifles that went with US troops into World War II, and proved a critical technological edge. They're highly sought after by collectors and anyone who wants a piece of history. Lots of people would just love to have one for the historical value.

[deaniac21]

65. The Garand is ADORED by many. Rightfully so.

[Mimosa]

71. Nice.

My stepfather taught me to shoot with that model rifle. I was about 11 going on 13. I enjoyed learning and didn't become a 'gun nut'.

I believe most of wouldn't want to be without weapons for home defense rather than being helpless in case of a break in.

[aikoaiko]

7. This DU thread from a year ago may help.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x342210


As I recall, the Administration only said they couldn't be imported, but the South Koreans own them and they may have made the decision to destroy them since there might not be many buyers outside the US.

[gejohnston]

10. I read some time ago that

South Korea offered to return some that has been sitting around for 60 years. My source said the administration said "feel free to keep them." I don't remember seeing how many or what condition.

Here is another take, most likely the most accurate:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/09/06/korean-perspective-on-the-m1-garand-sale/

From the Korea Times:

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/08/205_71329.html

Personally, I would love to get a carbine. ARs etc, have thier place, but old school walnut and steel is art.

[MineralMan]

12. There are plenty of M1s available on the market.

A little pricey, as far as I'm concerned, but there's no shortage of them, by any means. So, it's sort of a non-issue, really.

[Javaman]

29. I agree. pricey indeed. Like diamonds, there are a lot more of them out there

that people are lead to believe.

I'm actually looking for one myself.

also looking for a '03 Springfield.

[MineralMan]

30. My deer rifle is a sporterized Springfield

I love the .30-06 round for deer. I'm not hunting any more, though, so it hasn't been fired for years. I clean it once a year, anyhow, then put it back in the gun cabinet.

[PavePusher]

80. They'd be a bit less "pricey" if there were a few hundred thousand more on the market.

Basic economics.

[Javaman]

97. Actually, there are thousands of them...

just google "M1 Garand for sale" and you will get a ton of hits from sites that all they do is sell vintage rifles.

[PavePusher]

99. I know that.

You missed the point.

Basic economics.

[Javaman]

104. no I didn't, if you read my post above you will see that

I equate the selling of M1's with the selling of diamonds.

They keep the supply falsely short to raise the price.

And my point is: anyone really wanting a rifle and get them by the dozen at inflated prises.

M1's aren't traded as a commodity. It's basically closed bidding, so a false elevated price is normal because standardized exchange as there is with diamonds.

[PavePusher]

105. "They keep the supply falsely short to raise the price."

"they" is who? I don't know of anyone hording enough M1's to affect the entire market for them. Nothing like the diamond market at all.

There is a very finite supply of M1 rifles. The demand is much larger than the supply, thus prices are high. If we could get a few tens of thousands of them back from Korea, it might cause a varying drop in pricees, it would surely help satisfy market demand.

[baldguy]

14. Just what America needs: one million more military rifles on the street.

Why didn't S Korea sell them to their own people? Hmmm?

[Pigheaded]

23. You should probably learn what these are before posting

And how they would be sold.

PH

[krispos42]

27. Would you prefer a million Garands or a million AR-15s sold to Americans?

Given the choice, would you rather see a million American snap up these rifles, or a million Americans spend their money on AR-15s and AK-47-ish rifles?


And not buying any guns is not an option, so don't try to weasel out of the question.



What say you?

Semi-automatic rifles that weigh 10 pounds, take a bayonet, have no pistol grip, have no flash suppressor, have no provision for attaching scopes, have no provision for attaching tactical optics (lasers and flashlights) and have a fixed magazine capacity of 8 rounds?

Or semi-automatic rifles that weigh 7 pounds, maybe take a bayonet, have pistol grips, have provisions for attaching scopes, lasers, tactical flashlights, and a second pistol grip, and can feed from magazines of up to 90 rounds capacity?


Oh, and first one is parkerized steel with wooden furniture, and the second is black-coated metal with black-colored plastic furniture.

[baldguy]

40. This isn't "either these guns/or those guns".

Not buying a gun is ALWAYS an option.

And why isn't anyone answering my question: Why didn't S Korea sell them to their own people? They had them; they were trying to sell them.

[krispos42]

41. Weasel weasel weasel

Al Franken shakes his head sadly.

The fact is that every year, 15 million or more guns are sold in this country to private citizens. This amount is more or less fixed.

So, 15 million of them ARE going to be sold, whether or not the Garands are on the market or not. If people can't buy the Garands, they will buy AR-15s, AK-47s, SKSs, Glocks, Mossbergs, etc., because the prices and availability are comparable.

So YOU have the option of replacing 1 million new-manufacture guns with 1940's Garands. Keep in mind that by recycling old guns, you deny sales and thus profits of new guns. I would guess that your view on the import and sale of Garands is also shared by the executives of every single gun makers in the country. Smith and Wesson, Remington, Bushmaster, Springfield Armory Inc., Glock, Ruger, etc.

WITH THAT IN MIND... what is your answer?



As to the Koreas, I would presume that, despite having several hostile enemies on their border or very close buy, they are as gun-controlling as you are.

[baldguy]

78. 70% of Americans don't own guns. NOT owning a gun is certainly an option.

You're living in a (RW NRA) fantasy world is you think those guns MUST be sold. They don't

And you're correct about Korea being part of the civilized world in restricting gun ownership, and therefor being unable to sell them to Koreans. I guess they figured Americans are going to be killing each other anyway. Given the RW propaganda on the subject (which has been nicely parroted here) I can see why.

[krispos42]

86. Now your avoiding the question

15 or 16 million guns a year are sold in the US; regardless of individual choices made, THAT is the overall statistic, the trend, the market forces. Nothing is going to happen to change the number significantly, either up or down.

So, knowing that, but also giving the chance to make 7% of those guns sold either 70-year-old Garands OR modern rifles, shotguns, or pistols by companies like Bushmaster, Remington, and Glock... what do you prefer?

[baldguy]

94. And you're avoiding reality.

[krispos42]

96. You're avoiding both the question and reality, which does not bode well for you.

Have fun siding with the firearms manufacturers.

Remember, every time you cry "why do we need to import used weapons from oversea?" and support a ban on that importation, you're putting cash in the hands of Smith & Wesson and dozens of other companies.

Not to mention that those arms get sold to "somebody else", like a faction in an African civil war.

[Spider Jerusalem]

47. Not the "assault rifhe" nonsense again

with the right hardware you can mount a scope on an M1; tactical optics? You can mount a laser on one if you want too; it's not like it's that hard if you have access to a machine shop and can bore and tap a mount for it. With the weapon design and the en-bloc clip the 8 round capacity is a hard limit. Pistol grips confer no significant accuracy advantage, the only advantage a pistol grip has is that it's easier to "shoot from the hip" in a close-quarters situation, but this is highly impractical with most long arms anyway; it's never been legal, so far as I know, for civilians to own 90-round magazines (a 30-round mag is more usual for an AR-15 type weapon, before the ban on high capacity magazines); and considering that it's a clip-fed weapon a proficient shooter with multiple clips of ammunition is just as dangerous either way.

[PavePusher]

82. No, pistol-grips do not make it "easier to shoot from the hip".

That is utter bullshit.

90-round mags are perfectly legal in most states, but heavy, usually impractical and frequently unreliable.

[krispos42]

87. Yeah, I know, I know.

With a Bridgeport pretty much any gun can mount a scope. The point is that with a Glock or a tactical Mossberg or an AR-15, it comes out-of-the-box with the M1913 rails to put all that stuff on there. Just select your scope rings and get a screwdriver.

The Garand is top-fed, which means the scope has to be mounted forward or offset to the left side; either way required some machining by a gunsmith, unless you have an M-1D sniper Garand.

And I'm sure that somebody out there makes an after-market "tactical" Garand stock, with telescoping stock and pistol grip.

That it could be done isn't the issue; I can do the same thing to a 1903 Springfield, except that I can probably modify it to accept M-14 magazines instead of the fixed blind magazine there now. The 'tactical' M1903... :-)

It's the fact that once you buy an AR-15, either it comes ready to accept "evil black gun" tactical accessories, or you can buy a screw-on replacement part to do it from a catalogue.

You don't have to spend days or weeks and hundreds of dollars on a gunsmith to do the custom work.

[NickB79]

70. Black-powder muskets were military weapons at one point

I could almost guarantee that you wouldn't see any increase in shootings if these weapons were sold in the US. They are long, heavy, kick like a mule, only hold 8 rounds, and shoot relatively expensive ammo.

Not really what you'd see a gang member sporting around town.

I'd hazard a guess that S. Korea didn't sell them to their own people because few S. Koreans have as much enthusiasm for target shooting as Americans, there isn't nearly as much hunting in S. Korea compared to the US, and they could get higher profits from US shooters than from their own people.

[PavePusher]

81. Your ignorance.... astounding.

I do hope you have no .30-30 lever actions.... Or muzzle-loading muskets.

[-..__...]

18. See posted links.

There is one fallacy (allegedly), from what I've read from several accounts, the rifles in question are hardly "pristine".

There might be a few diamonds in the rough in the mix, but a lot of these rifles are probably only good for parts... which could still serve some useful purpose here.

[doc03]

20. According to the e-mail they were still packed in cosmoline n/t

[-..__...]

28. I'm sure they were... at least I hope they were.

Cosmoline is only to prevent corrosion during storage.

Over all condition/grade is another matter; after all, these things have seen service in at least two wars.

Then again... there were a lot of rumors floating around regarding these particular rifles.

[doc03]

21. I was at Cabela's a few days ago and they had about

6 bolt action Russian rifles with bayonets covered with cosmoline for $99 each. I don't know much about military rifles especially Russian ones.

[MineralMan]

24. You can hunt deer with them. Ammo is easy to get.

They're a cheap alternative to proper deer rifles, and lots of Hmong hunters use them in Minnesota - very effectively, too. The Mills Fleet Farm stores hear always have them, along with plenty of ammo.

[-..__...]

31. Mosin Nagants

Probably M44's or M 91/30's

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant

The marketplace has been flooded with them for a while now.

[Ikonoklast]

33. Probably Mosin Nagants.

Did any of them look like these rifles?



Different iterations of the same basic action.

I have a 1942 Izhevsk Arsenal M-91 hanging over my fireplace, looks like the second one down.

[doc03]

43. That looks like them, they had two models one in a 7.62x39 and

another in 7.62x54 they also had ammo for both. The cheaper model was $99 and had a folding bayonet. The other was a little more expensive.

[Erose999]

49. the 7.62 x 54 is a beast of a round, Mosin Nagants have the worst recoil of anything I've ever shot

And the powder used in that surplus Pakastani ammo you get in the big tins burns really dirty so they have to be cleaned thouroughly after shooting.

But other than that they're nice rifles. I have been considering buying one for myself if I ever have $100 I can't find a better use for.

[TheWraith]

62. They were probably Mosin Nagant 91/30s.

Those things are more common than Starbucks. You'll see them going online for about that price, shipped.

[tularetom]

25. Every time I look at my smooshed thumb nail

I have fond memories of the M1 Garand.

[Scuba]

36. "Thumbuster". n/t

[Downwinder]

63. +1

[kudzu22]

32. As far as I know it's just a re-import restriction

I'm sure they'd sell to collectors. Nice ones go for upwards of $1000. They're not especially dangerous compared to modern firearms that are freely available. The value is in the history.

[alfredo]

38. Think of the impact on domestic gun makers if there

was a huge influx of rifles dumped on the market. It would also drive down the price of M1's as collector items.

[slackmaster]

46. Firearms are not fungible. There would be no effect on domestic gun makers whatsoever.

Anyone who buys an M1 Garand does so largely because of its historic value. More modern weapons that are better suited for sporting purposes are available.

There are some Franken-Garands around built on receivers of recent manufacture using old recycled parts. Those are useful in service rifle shooting matches but will never have the appeal to collectors of the real thing, nor can they ever qualify as a bona fide curio or relic as defined by federal and sate laws.

The number of M1 rifles that exist in the world can never increase. Every one of them provides a reminder of an important piece of history. My best one is a "Greek return" rifle that I bought from the CMP. Greece borrowed a bunch of M1's during World War II and put very little wear on them. The Korean rifles are a valuable resource that could bring revenue into the hands of the federal government. Doing anything other than importing them and selling them to collectors is frankly insane.

[alfredo]

91. But if you deal in collector rifles, wouldn't hundreds of thousands

of M1's hitting the US market depress the value of your stock?

[slackmaster]

98. Point for clarity - Collectors don't deal. Most dealers don't collect.

One activity is a hobby, the other is a business. It's even a different kind of federal firearms license.

But if you deal in collector rifles, wouldn't hundreds of thousands... ...of M1's hitting the US market depress the value of your stock?

If I were an importer of collectible rifles I think I'd be glad to have a surge of importable, collectible rifles available to me at reasonable prices. If a dealer buys low he or she can sell low, which makes those products available to more potential customers.

[alfredo]

100. I've always looked at collecting as an investment. That's

where I am coming from.

[slackmaster]

101. I also regard my collection as an investment as well as a source of amusement

Being still in an active buying phase of my collection's life cycle, I'd seize the opportunity to buy another Garand or three at low prices if it becomes possible.

I'm confident their value will go up in the long run.

[alfredo]

103. You always have to think supply and demand.

[BiggJawn]

48. Since nobody currently makes the M1 Garand, I doubt Colt would feel much pain.

I'm not in the market for a 700, Ruger Model 1, or any of the AR clones.
I AM, however, interested in old military rifles. Colt wouldn't lose my money if a million M1's hit the market, they weren't going to get my money in the first place.

[-..__...]

54. Fulton Armory makes them...

but, they are not cheap by any means...

http://www.fulton-armory.com/M1-Garand-Rifles.aspx

[slackmaster]

58. Those are "FrankenGarands" and can never be transferred as curios or relics

But they are nicely built.

[-..__...]

67. According to Fulton Armory, they are C&R eligible.

FFL Information

* Submission of FFL: The FFL may be submitted by mail or by fax (not email). Please confirm that the FFL is current, legible, signed, and of standard size as issued by BATF (do not minimize or maximize). Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
* Curios or Relics (C&R) FFL: Applies ONLY to the M1 Garand & M1 Carbine
* California FFL Dealers: Please include your CFLC ID # on the upper right side of the FFL

http://www.fulton-armory.com/fultonarmoryusriflecal762mmm14-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1.aspx

I know there's grey area/fine line that the ATF uses to determine C&R status with regard to collectability and original military configuration.

But, they're using original USGI receivers and parts (except for barrels and stocks).

Nicely built, yes, but for the money I'd rather pick up a few CMP service grade M1's that aren't all prettied up. B-)

[slackmaster]

69. So noted

Thanks!

[BiggJawn]

60. No, they're not...

Wow.

[Mimosa]

72. Out of my price range.

But I'm a pistol shooter anyway.

[alfredo]

92. I guess it would mostly affect the collectors of M1's.

[apocalypsehow]

51. And even if true, so what? The M1 was an implement of war, and is useless for anything else.

Now that the war in question is long over, and the M1 is obsolete for today's military purposes, they should be melted down or otherwise destroyed.

[slackmaster]

59. Obviously you are not a golfer

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_v6Vx4TUIw6Y/SVN9s0mVEzI/AAAAAAAABGg/W7wh0xGYQx4/s400/eastwood+with+garand.jpg

[TheWraith]

61. Your comment speaks to a lack of understanding.

Completely aside from the fact that these are still highly usable rifles on the civilian market, they're also historical artifacts and reminders of past events. Are you of the opinion that old Civil War photos of people long dead should be melted down for the tin?

[BiggJawn]

64. And should they melt down "Sentimental Journey"?

I think not.

I just can't grok some people's intense hatred of firearms, I really can't...

[deaniac21]

66. You need some new information. It is a very popular buy and

when was the last time you read about one being used in a crime?

[slackmaster]

68. ...or in a war?

;-)

[Mimosa]

73. Are you a gun hater?

Those are nice rifles. They could be used for self defense in case society breaks down. Or they could be used for hunting.

[NickB79]

74. Millions of hunters would say you're dead wrong.

The .30-06 cartridge the M1 fires is probably the most popular deer round ever created, and M1's are still popular deer rifles to this day.

[-..__...]

77. Yep, and at the Camp Perry Matches too...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEQAxMF4h1A

http://www.thegca.org/camp-perry

[PavePusher]

83. Your ignorance.... stunning. n/t

[CreekDog]

75. I wouldn't lose any sleep if guns were being destroyed

:shrug:

[Jack Rabbit]

76. M1????

The basic combat weapon of the military since the middle of the Vietnam War has been the M16.

M1

M16

[Brother Buzz]

90. LOL, who forgot to bolt the Gun Dungeon door?

I'm glad to see all our DU gun enthusiasts get out and speak up. It's like DU or yore, long ago and far away.