Bill Would Allow Vets to Keep Their Battlefield Guns

CNSNEWS.com ^ | 8/28/02 | Jim Burns

[kattracks]

(CNSNews.com) - Current federal law threatens veterans with possible prison terms and hefty fines if they keep the machine guns they used during their war service prior to 1968. But two congressmen are trying to change the law and a leading veterans' group says it's about time.

U.S. Reps. Chris Cannon (R-Utah) and Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) have introduced legislation that would allow veterans to keep the machine guns they brought home as souvenirs following their service in America's military.

Cannon the legislation would give veterans 90 days in which to register their firearms with the Treasury Department.

But there is a stipulation. In order to qualify, a member of the Armed Forces while stationed outside the continental United States must have acquired the firearms before October 31, 1968. The legislation would also allow family members to register firearms inherited from veterans.

"When they (America's veterans) returned home they focused on reuniting with their family, securing an education, and building a home-not on wading through the burdensome bureaucracy associated with registering a firearm," Gibbons said.

"Now the machine guns they brought back are illegal and cannot be registered, and veterans or their family members are required to surrender them to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for destruction," Cannon said. "In many cases these war relic firearms are worth thousands of dollars. But in all cases they are meaningful souvenirs for our nation's veterans."

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms had no comment on the legislation, according to a spokesman.

But AMVETS, one of the nation's leading veterans' organizations, applauded the legislation, calling it an effort to clarify the present federal law, according to spokesman Rick Jones.

"Veterans should not be considered criminals for having and holding these souvenirs," said Jones. "These type of firearms represent a moment in their lives where there was extreme danger. The bill deals appropriately with how veterans should be treated should they possess these firearms.

"We know that veterans sometimes decorate their halls with a firearm captured from World War Two. The machine gun should be declared inoperable to conform with the laws of the United States. But to declare these veterans as criminals for having these firearms, we think is wrong," Jones added.

E-mail a news tip to Jim Burns.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

 

[archy]

USA Vets to USA Government: ........ Well they probably would not say what I would say.

Just remember what happened to Rome when the Roman legions returned from a tiresome session of foreign adventures and found that Rome had mutated into a form not to the liking of those legionaires and their commanders. Shortly thereafter, there was no more Roman empire, just as a few years ago something similar happened elsewhere and there was no more Soviet empire...or Soviet Union.

-archy-/-

[archy]

I wish this bill would go even further and have every veteran bring home their weapon and 1000 rounds of ammunition, as Swiss citizens do.

Not quite. The Swiss do indeed store and maintain their weapon and one sealed container of ammunition at home, but the ammount of ammo when I was there was a small sealed *sardine tin* of 24 rounds.

That was in the days of their supurb Stgw 57 7,5mm assault rifle, with a magazine capacity, coincidentally, of 24 rounds. Now that the Swiss are using their 5,56mm SIG 550 with a 30-round magazine, I expect it's a 50-round container of the GP-90 5,56mm ammo, normally packaged on 10-round stripper clips, that's so maintained.

There was and so far as I know is no limit on how much additional ammunition could be kept, of course, but that basic minimal amount was mandatory- there was even a criminal fine for failure to do so, as I recall.

[Vinnie_Vidi_Vici]

I was a demolition Sgt! Does this mean I can keep a case of C4 at the house???

[Smokin' Joe]

I can. I object to registration, period.

If one of the landmark decisions regarding the second amendment was based on the inapropriateness of the weapon in question (short barreled shotgun) as a military firearm, there should be no question of the appropriateness of a machine gun, captured or otherwise.

Even under that lame decision, the Second Amendment should apply, and sans infringement, there should be no registration.

As for veterans, we trusted these individuals with tanks, warplanes, combat ships, even nuclear weapons. What? we can't trust them with a rifle when they get home? If anyone has earned the right, they have.

Or is registration simply a precursor to rounding up the weapons in question? As for demilling the weapons, phooey! It is already legal to own a demilled machine gun. It is a display piece only, incapable of firing or being made to fire. (Useless sculpture.)

Just repeal the NFA and let these guys keep their stuff.

[archy]

...the legislation would give veterans 90 days in which to register their firearms with the Treasury Department.

Uh-huh. That is register and pay the government imposed $250.00 "tax" for having a naughty weapon.

It's $200. But during the 1968 amnesty, I believe that fee was waived.

-archy-/-

[archy]

I was a demolition Sgt! Does this mean I can keep a case of C4 at the house???

Just be thankful that you were not a medic, and didn't bring back a case of something far less enjoyable....

-archy-/-

[Squantos]

Worm on a batfag hook in my humble opinion........nam era swedish K's and AK's will remain buried I suspect ......... until this bait and switch law is proven to be valid........

Stay Safe !

[archy]

Didn't Bob bring home a fifty? I would imagine he would love to hang it on his wall instead of keeping it buried.

I don't know. But some of those of us who dealt with other, somewhat larger weaponry may have some potential custody disputes. I could well imagine having that sort of problem with my old driver regarding my old shootrin' iron....

[Wurlitzer]

"Just remember what happened to Rome when the Roman legions returned from a tiresome session of foreign adventures and found that Rome had mutated into a form not to the liking of those legionaires and their commanders. Shortly thereafter, there was no more Roman empire, just as a few years ago something similar happened elsewhere and there was no more Soviet empire...or Soviet Union"

I must have read your post wrong. You are not implying, are you, that a bunch of vets with souvenir weapons could topple the US government are you? Our military was forced to endure clinton and did not revolt although I suspect they were revolted.

[AAABEST]

You've been a very articulate and thoughtful 2A advocate since you've been here.

I apologize for that cat joke way back when, when I had no idea who you were.

[Wurlitzer]

US government are you=US Goverment. Too many are you's.

[Joe Brower]

Squantos, yer mind works in sneaky ways.

Sorta like my own.

[300winmag]

Worm on a batfag hook in my humble opinion........nam era swedish K's and AK's will remain buried I suspect ......... until this bait and switch law is proven to be valid........

There was an idea to let GIs in Desert Storm bring back one enemy weapon apiece, along with a "free" tax stamp for the full-auto ones. The idea was that it was a free bonus (paid for by Saddam, and not the American taxpayer), and the returning GI could always turn it into legal cash if he wanted. Needless to say, that got shot down faster than an Iraqi MiG.

The idea was that legally-registered automatic weapons represent zero threat to the American people. The only crimes ever committed with the 500,000 legal Class IIIs was one robbery, with a stolen one, and one murder, by a cop using his registered weapon. Not much of a threat, statistically.

In Detroit, a "hot" AK47 goes for about $200 on the street. A legally-registered one, impossible for non-police to own in Michigan, would be worth at least ten times as much on the legal market.

The unannounced amnesty in 1968 made a lot of money for people who converted their illegal weapons into legal ones. A publicized amnesty today would "flush" a lot of weapons into the open, allowing people to stop worrying, and turn the item into something legal, and worth some significant money, even if the tax stamp had to be paid.

And if they do that, they should also allow a legal "freebie" for bringing back captured enemy weapons by our troops as a no-cost bonus.

[Lurker]

Actually the exchange went something like this:

Nazi General to Swiss General: "What will you do when we send a million men marching across your border?"

Swiss General to Nazi General: "We will all shoot twice and go home."

L

[SLB]

Does this mean that if I can find the M60 I carried in Viet Nam I can take it out to pop a few caps next week? Grin!

[Shooter 2.5]

Apology accepted.
I have written things on FR that after thinking about it, I wanted to retract.
I had one person on FR accuse me of not shooting at all. I had to tell him that as far as I was concerned he was right and that I didn't feel like I shoot very much.
One of the most important things I have learned on a message board was to stop trying to be right. If I was wrong, I learned something and perhaps I can use the knowledge later. Another thing I learned was that not everyone especially me, can write the way we want to. It leads to misunderstandings and arguments. I also keep a little list of FR people that I don't have anything to do with. It saves me a lot of aggravation. By the way, you weren't on the list.
Thanks for the reply.

[Ancesthntr]

There should be a general amnesty to allow people to register any class three firearms that are currently illegal.

How can anyone object to that? Firearms that are currently illegal by fiat will be brought into the legal system and have the safeguards associated with that system. They will be registered and required to be transfered only to people who have a background check and are fingerprinted.

Marktwain, I object. Registration is a prelude to confiscation - always has been, always will be. The only question is how long it takes those with registration lists to demand that the weapon in question be surrendered. If you doubt that, try asking the people who registered long guns in NYC in 1966, or the suckers that registered "assault rifles" in California. Try asking those in foreign countries (Nazi Germany, Rwanda, Uganda, Cambodia, etc. ) that had to register their guns how they feel about it - if, that is, you can find any survivors of the subsequent actions of their benevolent governments.

You make the faulty assumption that the government will obey the law as rigorously as it expects us, on pain of prison, to do. If you truly believe that no future government, esp. of the Clinton-type, will use these registration lists as tools of confiscation, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Registration is somehow considered OK for guns, but not for other Constitutionally-protected items like Bibles. You should think about that. Would you register your Bible if a law said you had to? Would you permit the government to limit the design of your Bible, the number you own, etc.? Would you apply for a permit to attend church? How would you feel about a law that limited the type or number of printing presses (or ink-jet printers, copiers, fax machines, etc) that you owned, and required that you register all of them?

You should also think about what your response would be if the government repealed (according to all of the legalities set forth in the Constitution) the 1st Amendment (that's right, the 1st) - do you think that such an act would enable it to outlaw the possession of Bibles, attendance at a house of worship, etc.? If not (and I certainly hope not), then you should consider the effect of the laws that outlaw or restrict the possession of certain firearms, much less the repeal of the 2nd Amendment that the gun-grabbers so desparately hope for at some point in the future. These existing laws are as repugnant to our way of life as a law that would ban Bibles. Registration of guns is as repugnant as registration of Bibles.

Try to think outside of the box. Don't be too caught up in thinking that if there's a law that says something, that it is somehow OK. The Nazis were masters at legally implementing the most repugnant and odious laws in the history of mankind, and their judges obediently said that it was all legal. No one, however, bothered to stand up and say that the whole idea of government legislating about certain things was impermissable (maybe, perhaps, because guns had already been confiscated from all opponents of the Nazis - how's that for a tie-in?).

[Squantos]

Yeah I remember when I returned from DS/DS my EOD team worked over time with the rumor that enemy AK's ect were booby trapped and should be turned in to BatFags ,FLEA's LEO's and or DOD-EOD teams (not LEO bomb squads).......... That was just one of the ploys to recover such battle field pickups.......

This law I consider just one more effort to catch those who choose to ignore such revenue based socialist BS laws.......

Personally I never had a use for full auto even when I carried one. Bullet hoses are fun on the range when ya have free ammo from uncle sugar but a waste of money when ya have to foot the bill yerself....The NFA registered Classs III items I possess are investment buys unless of course TEOTWAWKI appears on the horizon :o)

Stay Safe Ya'll !!

[Ancesthntr]

Please see my post #37. I hope that you don't think it OK to sell out your Constitutional right to keep and bear arms just because you (or some vet) will make a few bucks selling a full-auto AK-47.

I also hope that you realize that the law of supply and demand won't be repealed by this, or any other, proposed law. If this law passes and several hundred thousand legal machine guns are put on the market, prices will drop. That $2,000 gun will be going for $500-$1,000. And no, I don't own or sell machine guns - frankly I'd be happy to see the supply increase and prices drop, so that maybe I could afford one. But I'm still against this proposal, and any other one that will register weapons that are not presently registered.

[Joe Brower]

Well said.

As far as:

Try to think outside of the box. Don't be too caught up in thinking that if there's a law that says something, that it is somehow OK.

I think the converse of this is also apt:

"One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws, but conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." -- Martin Luther King