[KY Moose]

300,000 M-14s destined for trash pile
Petition calls on Congress instead to sell guns to help pay for Iraq war

WorldNetDaily.com (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33080)

A petition drive is underway to convince lawmakers to "civilianize" hundreds of thousands of M-14 military battle rifles so they can be legally sold by the government to the general public as a way to pay for the Iraq war.

According to the online petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/M14CMP03/petition.html), "there is a strong demand for an M-14 DCM [Director of Civilian Marksmanship] program, which will curb government waste by providing up to $300-600 million [for] deficit reduction."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/images2/m14.jpg
M-14

"With uncertainty of the price tag of the current war, this will help pay for freedoms we enjoy in this country," says the petition. "With the looming war deficit, our government should not throw away hundreds of millions of dollars by destroying M-14 rifles – some of which are brand new."

The petition, which is being spearheaded by Robert A. Yoder, says as many as 300,000 rifles could wind up in the scrap heap without the government getting any return on its investment.

The DCM program to save the M-14s could work like a similar program involving another venerable military workhorse, the M-1 (Garand) and M-1 carbine series of military rifles.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/images2/m1garand.jpg
M1 Garand

The DCM sold those through the Civilian Marksmanship Program (http://www.odcmp.com/), a course that promotes firearms safety training and rifle practice for all qualified U.S. citizens with special emphasis on youth.

The Civilian Marksmanship Program also offers for sale AR-15-type match rifles, M1917 Enfields, M1903 bolt-action rifles (a former U.S. military weapon) and .22-caliber target rifles at subsidized rates.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/images2/m1903.jpg
M1903 bolt-action rifle

"The U.S. Rifle, 7.62 mm, M-14 was the first rifle the U. S. fielded that improved upon the highly regarded U. S. Rifle, Caliber.30, M1 (Garand) and attempted to give U. S. Forces a NATO-standardized weapon," says the online petition. "The M-14 came into active service around 1957 and remained the standard infantry weapon until the official adoption of the M-16 rifle in the late 1960s.

"Like its predecessor, the M-14 is now relegated to ship's arms rooms, ROTC detachments, storage bins in government arsenals and, of late, the demilitarized scrap pile," says the petition.

[Skunkabilly]

This is a joke right?

I think I want to :barf:....

[Covey Rise]

so we can buy some m-14's.

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

Joke or not, I signed it. I'll take 4, please.

Regards,
Rabbit.

[Dionysusigma]

Signed...mine's in the late 7500's. How many signatures do ya think we will need to get the government's attention on this?

[JPM70535]

While I would love to purchase an M-14, isn't there the problem of it being a fully automatic weapon? If I'm wrong,please correct me, but if M-14s are full auto capable,I doubt that they could be sold to the public in the same way M-1 garands are.

Before I get shot down in flames let me say I fully believe that 2A makes no distinction between full vs semi auto operation and that my RKBA ought not be limited by goivernment statute.

[Salpalinja]

Make them semi-auto only, and sell them to europe. I would like one.

[gunsmith]

wants to throw them away and fire them...
give them to every vet with an hon discharge!!!

[VaughnT]

I signed. #7753. I dearly hope they don't go through with their plan to pitch out all those fine weapons. Converting them to semi-auto only wouldn't take any time or energy and it would save us more than money.

What congressmen are in charge of this area?

[Bill St. Clair]

JPM70535: While I would love to purchase an M-14, isn't there the problem of it being a fully automatic weapon? If I'm wrong,please correct me, but if M-14s are full auto capable,I doubt that they could be sold to the public in the same way M-1 garands are.

The petition contains a description of the 14-minute procedure necessary to convert an M14 from select-fire to semi-auto. This probably won't satisfy the BATFE nazis, "once a machine gun, always a machine gun", so maybe Congress would have include in the law that adds these rifles to the CMP program a provision making it legal to own.

[vertigo7]

Signed.. I'll take 5 of those, thanks :)

[El Tejon]

Don't forget to write your Congressperson and Senators as well!

[WilderBill]

I signed it, too.
Of course, we all know that once our government finds a way to waste our tax dollars they never let go of it! :barf:

[geekWithA.45]

for m-14s in Afghanistan, what in hell are we doing throwing them away? :what:

Huh?

And I'll take 3.

Signature #7800

[cool45auto]

7801

[Invisible Swordsman]

Done. #7801.

Two for me, thanks.

[Lone_Gunman]

You can't use an M14 for duck hunting.

[OF]

7820

[BowStreetRunner]

7830

[jacketch]

7832

[Wild Bill]

Done x2 ... 7837 & 7839

[keyhole]

#7844


And I'll take 2, and a dozen for the Junior Club.

http://members.cox.net/bcsgc/visitors/junior_club.html

Passed along to the rest of the crew.

[general]

Signed.# 7845.... Never destroy firearms or any other operable equipment.

[enichols]

#7847

[obiwan1]

7862 I'll take 2:D

[dodge]

7872

[Cadwallader]

7880

I doubt I'd buy one, but I'd like to see them made available and made into money instead of destroyed.

[Shootist45]

7901

I'll take 3, one to shoot and 2 for parts.

[J Miller]

Signed: 7916

I'd love to have one of these, along with an M1 Garand.

[AZTOY]

7924

2 rifles should do:D

[Don Gwinn]

Signed it.

The crazy thing is that they'll cite "public safety" concerns as if:

1. Terrorists and criminals are shooting in CMP matches to qualify, or

2. If they did, a Garand would stop their nefarious schemes, since it's SO much less effective than an M14 . . . . .
:rolleyes:

[ZekeLuvs1911]

Done......hope they listen.

[CZ-100]

I would buy One.. or Two.. or maybe Three :D

Gotto thinkk ahead.. I got Two Boys:D

[citizen]

7944:D

[Bob41081]

I'd like 3. I'm 8033. My first post by the way.

Bob

[MicroBalrog]

You know, this one stupid thing Israel would NEVER do.

[SoCalGeek]

I doubt the petition by itself will do very much... write and call your senators, etc. Get a lot of attention for this, and it might actually happen.

[mephisto]

8072

[six 4 sure]

#8099

[Zer000]

8116

Not that any online petion has ever been succesfull... :(

[44Brent]

8135

[ILM Sniper]

#8181

300,00 M-14 rifles destined for the scrap heap. Hope the petition helps. If it does go through I'll take 3 thank you. If it doesn't :cuss:

[Solinvictus70]

Signed it.

[Sactown]

8217

[Fed168]

8238.

[WingZero]

I signed, and I would like an M-14 please!:D

[NRA Instructor]

8274

[Capital Punishment]

8286

[BB93YJ]

#8298, I'll take three, but would settle for just one...

[Number 6]

I hate to rain on everyone's parade but there is another reason why the government would be cautious about releasing these rifles to the CMP. If they release 300,000 rifles it will flood the market with cheap guns and therefore hurt the business if not destroy companies like Springfield Armory, Colt, Bushmaster, Armalite and any other such rifle producers. What the government would be doing is creating unfair competition that many companies could not compete against, thereby violating market principles. Many people argue for the government to stay away from the economy and in this instance they are doing that by not releasing the rifles.

[.45FMJoe]

#8319

[Nightcrawler]

I doubt it costs Springfield Armory $1300 to build an M1A, with modern manufacturing techniques. A little competition would drive down the prices, and would cause them to up their quality. There'd still be a market for them for customizing, carbines, match rifles, etc.

I doubt this petition will do much good, but it's certainly worth a shot. WRITE YOUR CONGRESSCRITTERS!

If nothing else, they should simply torch-cut the receivers and sell the rifles as parts kits. Wouldn't be as profitable as selling the complete rifles, but imagine all the nice, like new GI parts there'd be out there for upgrading M1As!

If I was in charge of the federal government, all surplus military arms would be sold to qualified individuals who demonstrate proficiency though the Civilian Marksmanship Program. $450 for a used M16A1. $550 for an M16A2. Maybe $700 for an M14. $2500 for an M60. $400 for an M9 Beretta.

Imagine the cash the military could rake in. All of that money would go towards a massive DoD reloading plant, where they would use spent brass from military ranges and reload ammunition, thus cutting the costs of military live-fire training (which soldiers can NEVER have too much of) and allowing for more training ammunition to be available.

Ahh, to dream...

[alan]

I siugned and e-mailed the originator of the petition. Raise all manner of hell with the congress and senate.

Bill St. Calir and JPM70535:

Original M-14's had selective fire capability, but were uncontrollable in full automaitc mode. They were subsequently modified by the government, external parts were removed, internal parts removed or swapped, and as I recall, 7 welds made. I very much doubt that any of these converted M-14, are "readilly restorable" to original condition, selective fire capability.

Given that I personally don't shoot rifles anymore, I doubt that I'd buy one, however public monies and property should not be tossed down then drain, as is being done with the destruction of m-14 rifles anfd other small armes, including M-1's then were run through "Captain Crunch".

[lazarus]

Of course this would work quite well. Look at the Garands that are sold through the DCM....and folks are snappin' them up like crazy! A real honest-to-god M14 from the "Gubment?" Bear in mind, fellas....these are FORGED receivers and are worth their weight in gold. Sproingfield Armoury sells the M1A's for over a grand....and they're cast! These things are highly desirable to us semi-auto shooters. Right now, the only forged receivers available are the Chicom units.....Norinco and Polytech...decent, but soft bolts and lousy stocks. New, they get $700-800 plus. Dunno about you, but I'd pay a grand for a pre-ban M14!

:what: :what: :what:

[jimb124]

Signature #8413...Let's hope this works! I'll take at least one - maybe two!!!
Jim :D

[TechBrute]

#8415

[45R]

That is so wrong!!!

[Wade]

8511

[mormonsniper]

8523

One for me and one for my daughter (USN, Operation Iraqi Freedom) and one for my grandson of 2 weeks.;)

[Moparmike]

8594

Just one more example of excessive government waste...

Great rifle, or so I have heard. We as taxpayers need to be able to recoop and see the benifits of our money.

[agony]

#8600

For the people.....

[George Hill]

8615.

I'll buy several.

[2nd Amendment]

#8644

[TexasVet]

8678

[Feanaro]

Signed, 8700. I can't afford one but I see no reason to waste such fine weapons.

[KY Moose]

It's hard to believe there is over 8,600 signatures on the petition. That's about a thousand or more signatures since I signed it after posting this thread here. My signature is in the low 7,600 range. The current numbers say a lot.

[Malone LaVeigh]

It doesn't seem to me that this would be too much to ask of a "gun friendly" administration. We shouldn't have to go to Congress for this. The executive branch is in charge of defense.

[LiquidTension]

8746

[2dogs]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33080

300,000 M-14s destined
for trash pile

Petition calls on Congress instead to sell guns to help pay for Iraq war

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 15, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

A petition drive is underway to convince lawmakers to "civilianize" hundreds of thousands of M-14 military battle rifles so they can be legally sold by the government to the general public as a way to pay for the Iraq war.

According to the online petition, "there is a strong demand for an M-14 DCM [Director of Civilian Marksmanship] program, which will curb government waste by providing up to $300-600 million [for] deficit reduction."




"With uncertainty of the price tag of the current war, this will help pay for freedoms we enjoy in this country," says the petition. "With the looming war deficit, our government should not throw away hundreds of millions of dollars by destroying M-14 rifles – some of which are brand new."

The petition, which is being spearheaded by Robert A. Yoder, says as many as 300,000 rifles could wind up in the scrap heap without the government getting any return on its investment.

The DCM program to save the M-14s could work like a similar program involving another venerable military workhorse, the M-1 (Garand) and M-1 carbine series of military rifles.



The DCM sold those through the Civilian Marksmanship Program, a course that promotes firearms safety training and rifle practice for all qualified U.S. citizens with special emphasis on youth.

The Civilian Marksmanship Program also offers for sale AR-15-type match rifles, M1917 Enfields, M1903 bolt-action rifles (a former U.S. military weapon) and .22-caliber target rifles at subsidized rates.



"The U.S. Rifle, 7.62 mm, M-14 was the first rifle the U. S. fielded that improved upon the highly regarded U. S. Rifle, Caliber.30, M1 (Garand) and attempted to give U. S. Forces a NATO-standardized weapon," says the online petition. "The M-14 came into active service around 1957 and remained the standard infantry weapon until the official adoption of the M-16 rifle in the late 1960s.

"Like its predecessor, the M-14 is now relegated to ship's arms rooms, ROTC detachments, storage bins in government arsenals and, of late, the demilitarized scrap pile," says the petition.

[axeman_g]

8853

[Devonai]

8963

[Meowhead]

9076 here.

This is sad, really. Apparently Our Gubmint would rather destroy a few hundred thousand guns, which could be sold at around 500-1000 bucks each, than make some money by selling them to the public.

Then again, they ARE semiautomatic assault machine gun armor-piercing antiaircraft weapons, and the number one choice of criminals and terrorists..

[Horny Toad]

9105




Horny Toad

[Ledbetter]

9228

[bogie]

Idea: Call the congresscritters, and ask 'em to "amnesty" a quantity of 'em for sale as Class III firearms - That way, they don't have to spend the 15 minutes per, and instead of $1,000/rifle, they can sell 'em for several times that...

[shermacman]

I was #9369 as of June 16, 2003.
Sould be run just like the Civilian Marksmanship Program does with the M1 Garand.

[Biff]

Signed #9417

[natedog]

Almost to 10,000. I was 9,606.

[Jrob24]

Concerning the machinegun issue, I'm assuming that they were made before 1986 so even if the ATF pretends they're still machineguns is there still any obstacle to selling them?

[ed dixon]

Signed. Gimme.

[Strings]

DEFINATELY get me off my backside and into the CMP...

#9718

[Stickjockey]

9762...and there's been a bunch more in the 10 minutes or so since I signed!:D

[D.W. Drang]

Here are a few messages posted to an email group I'm on.
I "signed" that petition, too, but I suspect these guys are correct, and it's a non-issue.
(Names of authors and group, etc., deleted to preseve their privacvy.)
> Read the article with a critical eye and you'll find that this whole
> campaign is half-baked. CMP is no longer a military program, it's a
> corporation and it's profits stay in house to promote shooting
> sports.
> I'm not sure how the CMP acquires rifles, but I expect that they don't
> BUY them from the military, but rather receive obsolete equipment for
> disposition.
> So how does the money get to the government? It doesn't. So
> discussions about opening up a revenue stream are garbage. Additionally, the
> idea of the government passing M14's (no matter what their modifications) is
> going to enrage the Feinsteins and Schumers and they will put the measure
> through incredible hurdles before it can actually go through. So before the
> thing even passes, millions upon millions of dollars will have been spent to
> legislate and litigate the program, test to ensure that modified rifles
> cannot be quickly restored to full-auto capability, etc. Frankly, the
> idea of such a project returning much of any revenue to the Federal coffers
> is laughable.
>
> I'd love to see surplus M14's released to civilian shooters rather than
> wasted, but trying to justify it this way does NOT improve our (gun
> owners) credibility as responsible, intelligent, and honest people. This
> proposal is irresponsibly researched, poorly thought out, and intellectually
> dishonest. In fact, it is blatantly political, and thus utterly discountable.
>
> Sorry to be so critical of this, but supporting garbage does us no good
> as a group.
>
Reply:
> This "petition" originated about ten years ago, pre-CMP. Fred's would
> send out the "campaign" with your shipping documents when you purchased
> from them.
>
> The CMP does not pay for their rifles pre se, but they do pay a hefty
> "handling charge." The monies are used to support marksmanship of many
> kinds, & gun ownership thereby.
>
> Few M14s remain in inventory. Besides the destruction program initiated
> by the Clinton administration, the Gov't has given tens of thousands of
> M14s to our allies such as Lithuania and Kosovo. There is a looming
> shortage of M14s for the new roles envisioned for 7.62-MM rifles, which
> is why new 7.62-MM rifles will be under development.
(Later post by same author; many of you would recognize his name...)
>This is an inadvertent hoax. The "petition," as I earlier averred,
>dates from the early- to mid-'90's, when the Clinton Administration
>didn't see a gun it didn't want to shred. The premise is ten or more
>years out of date.
>
>The guy that was in charge of the shredder is a friend of mine.
>
>The guy searching the world for M14s for Special Operations is also a
>friend of mine.
>
>Thus, I'm confident in my facts.
>
>Trust me, no M14s are being destroyed by our Gov't save by wear & tear &
>wastage in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Believe me, when I say there
>is no chance in H*ll that the few that remain in US inventory will be
>released to *anyone*.

[D.W. Drang]

Well, I posted it in the OTHER "300,000 M-14s' thread, I guess I'll post it here, too...
> Read the article with a critical eye and you'll find that this whole
> campaign is half-baked. CMP is no longer a military program, it's a
> corporation and it's profits stay in house to promote shooting
> sports.
> I'm not sure how the CMP acquires rifles, but I expect that they don't
> BUY them from the military, but rather receive obsolete equipment for
> disposition.
> So how does the money get to the government? It doesn't. So
> discussions about opening up a revenue stream are garbage. Additionally, the
> idea of the government passing M14's (no matter what their modifications) is
> going to enrage the Feinsteins and Schumers and they will put the measure
> through incredible hurdles before it can actually go through. So before the
> thing even passes, millions upon millions of dollars will have been spent to
> legislate and litigate the program, test to ensure that modified rifles
> cannot be quickly restored to full-auto capability, etc. Frankly, the
> idea of such a project returning much of any revenue to the Federal coffers
> is laughable.
>
> I'd love to see surplus M14's released to civilian shooters rather than
> wasted, but trying to justify it this way does NOT improve our (gun
> owners) credibility as responsible, intelligent, and honest people. This
> proposal is irresponsibly researched, poorly thought out, and intellectually
> dishonest. In fact, it is blatantly political, and thus utterly discountable.
>
> Sorry to be so critical of this, but supporting garbage does us no good
> as a group.
>
Reply:
> This "petition" originated about ten years ago, pre-CMP. Fred's would
> send out the "campaign" with your shipping documents when you purchased
> from them.
>
> The CMP does not pay for their rifles pre se, but they do pay a hefty
> "handling charge." The monies are used to support marksmanship of many
> kinds, & gun ownership thereby.
>
> Few M14s remain in inventory. Besides the destruction program initiated
> by the Clinton administration, the Gov't has given tens of thousands of
> M14s to our allies such as Lithuania and Kosovo. There is a looming
> shortage of M14s for the new roles envisioned for 7.62-MM rifles, which
> is why new 7.62-MM rifles will be under development.
(Later by same author)
>This is an inadvertent hoax. The "petition," as I earlier averred,
>dates from the early- to mid-'90's, when the Clinton Administration
>didn't see a gun it didn't want to shred. The premise is ten or more
>years out of date.
>
>The guy that was in charge of the shredder is a friend of mine.
>
>The guy searching the world for M14s for Special Operations is also a
>friend of mine.
>
>Thus, I'm confident in my facts.
>
>Trust me, no M14s are being destroyed by our Gov't save by wear & tear &
>wastage in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. Believe me, when I say there
>is no chance in H*ll that the few that remain in US inventory will be
>released to *anyone*.

[4v50 Gary]

I signed. BTW, I'll have to make room in the safe if I can get one but that's the least of my problems right now. :D

[Blain]

Anyone who doesn't like this idea, is a communist!

[willyjixx]

well drang i hope there is a lot of truth to your findings cuz if not i further bolsters the fact that the Govt does nothing to prevent fraud waste an abuse short of hiring a bunch of CID agents

[Zackmeister]

#10015

I don't see why they want to destroy valuable guns that could be reused. Waste not, want not.

[S_O_Laban]

1055 has this been passed on to other boards?

[blue86buick]

10,064

[KY Moose]

Originally posted by S_O_Laban
has this been passed on to other boards?

Yep. I posted this on two other boards. If you belong to a board where this is not posted, then go ahead and spread the word.

[zahc]

10,959

[Ironbarr]

11030

[jimpeel]

11149

[Devonai]

I've told everyone I know who cares about this, but I don't think we'll gain anyone's interest unless we get up to 300,000 signatures... one for each of the rifles.

[Ironbarr]

Well, with jimpeel's number (at only $100 each), we're over one million. Maybe some bean counter will realize that a million's a million and only 199 more and they can buy another plane or so.:rolleyes:

Anyway - it's a start.

-Andy
.

[firestar]

Signed it.

If Bush lets this happen, he is not doing the job we expect of him. I hope he doesn't fall asleep on us again!

Come on Bush! Just do ONE positive thing for us gun owners! I thought you were supposed to be on our side?

[firestar]

I would buy at LEAST two of these because they are in .308. The 30.06 is not as cheep on ammo.

Are M-14s C&R guns?

[Dr.Rob]

There is a claim there that DCM M1's are being sold for $100 to qualified buyers, that's a lie.

Anyone else catch that?

[The Silver Bullet 1719]

11762

[alan]

Dr. Rob:

I noticed that bit about $100.00 M-1's in the petition. The guy is way off on that, as the last time I inquired, as I recall, the CMP was charging around $500.00. A U.S. Military M-1, in serviceable or possibly better condition might well be worth that price, but that is beside the point.

Also, Mr. Yoder's mention of the necessity to "civilianize" the M-14 seems strange, since selective fire capability was long since removed from the M-14, via removal/replacement of parts, as well as, from what I had read some years back, 7 welds, specified by the Ordinance Dept. which supposedly came up with the modification. One takes it that the military didn't want any "field revitilazition" of selective fire capability.

As to the procedure mentioned, removal of a "lug", while I've fired M-14's a couple of times, I never got into the "insides" of one.

[Sam Adams]

11,850 Keep 'em coming!

[Byron Quick]

#12,225:what:

My comment was: I will buy many during the remainder of my life. I'm watching and I vote.

[alan]

A couple of posters have opined to the effect that the petition is dated, poorly thought out, is a cheap political stunt and so on, all of which might be correct, HOWEVER.

I believe that the HOWEVER is important, due to the fact that other no longer used military small arms have been destroyed at taxpayer expense, there was those M-1 Rifles and Captain Crunch, and or the ones simply torch cut and or sawed through, to mention just one instance, how many am I missing.

12,000 plus signatures on this petition just might make some sort of an impression with those congress critters who look the other way respecting such wanton waste as the demiliterization(destruction) of military small arms, "surplus to needs", or otherwise "unserviceable", small arms which in fact, could be sold to law abiding Americans, thereby perhaps returnimng some money to the public purse.

[firestar]

Even if the government sold these for $300 each, that would still be 9 million bucks! I guess that is just chicken scratch to our lords and ladies in congress. What the hay, they can get 9 million with just one small tax increase. Why bother trying to save any money? There is more where that came from.:rolleyes: Never mind that many people are losing their jobs and can't pay their bills, 9 million just isn't worth bothering with.

[Number 6]

One must realize that a lot of the time when dealing with the government and finances what could seem like a very simple cost saving procedure could in actuality cost more in the long run. This is due to the many hidden costs that are present in a bureaucracy; these can range from paperwork, storage of paperwork, and any other people that need to be paid to transfer these guns to the CMP. I do not know if releasing these guns to the CMP will cost the government anything but one cannot assume that the money made will magically outweigh the costs. Nevertheless these hidden costs need to be taken into consideration. Just by claiming that the government would save money does not make it true, unless one does a rather extensive analysis of the costs.

Now back to my previous argument. If the government releases 300,000 M14 rifles into the market then they would be violating market principles. Springfield Armory, Bushmaster, Armalite and any similar rifle producer compete within themselves to meet what is a fair and competitive price for their firearms. It might be the case that we all think that a Springfield M1A is overpriced and they are exploiting the consumer, but the reality is that they are simply meeting their price that is demanded. If they were overcharging people significantly they would go out of business since people would substitute a Springfield M1A for a Bushmaster AR-15 since they would find the AR-15 more economically feasible. I do realize these rifles are very different but that in an economic sense people will substitute a comparable product in place of a more expensive one. So if Springfield is selling their M1As at a competitive price what then happens if the government fills the market with rifles that are grossly under the market value? It will force Springfield, Bushmaster and the like to drop their prices to an uncompetitive level. This will then potentially drive them out of business. Think of it this way. If the government gave the rifles to Springfield instead of the CMP this would then be construed as a subsidy from the government. Conversely if the government gives away these rifles to someone else this then can be construed as a fine against Springfield. By putting such a massive quantity of rifles into the market the government then runs the risk of driving legitimate gun manufacturers out of business.

Oh yeah and if I was a communist Blain I do not think I would be using such elaborate market based arguments to make a point. If offered to us I would gladly buy a surplus M14, I just realize the damage such a prospect can have upon a free market.

[eotp]

signed petition

#12,293

[B_Scott]

Number 6,
You make some good points, however if you go to the civilian marksmanship program website you will see all the prerequisites to buying one of their rifles. They will not be competing directly with newly manufactured rifles. They will barely be considered indirect competitors. Most people doen't even know about the CMP (http://www.odcmp.com/)

DW Drang,
I seem to remember in the American Rifleman I got yesterday there was an ad for the CMP and it said something about it being funded through congress.

[Gewehr98]

Blain likes to use that communist barb, it may be one of his favorites tools against people describing a dissenting opinion:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18184&highlight=communist


I didn't sign the petition. It needs some massaging, and correction of errors, before anybody high in the government food chain will take it seriously. The intent is good, as is the cause. But it gets tripped up in the execution...

[Russ]

Isn't that sweet. Let's destroy guns worth anywhere from $500 to $1,500 just for the fun of it. I wonder is Springfield Armory has given them some input on this? It seems to me they would want them desroyed so they can sell more new ones. Maybe the US Gov could cut them a small commission so as to alay their fears.

[alan]

Number 6:

Perhaps unknowingly, perhaps not so, you might have made a strong case for the need of government reform, what with your quite valid reference to all those "hidden costs".

Exactly who is it that is served by the imposition of such costs? Readers might think on that.

[hps1]

What a waste by our illustrious leaders and an insult to those who were issued this rifle in defense of our country. :rolleyes: :banghead:

Please cut and paste the link and e.mail to all your shooting friends. The M14 makes an excellent rifle to shoot CMP service rifle matches, not to mention the fact it is a piece of history.

www.PetitionOnline.com

Regards,
hps

[Steve Smith]

He didn't even have the knowledge that the DCM doesn't exist, and the letter is so old that he mentions $100 M1s and he suggests that M14s would sell for $650.

What a tremendous waste of signatures, considering they will get a 3 minute laugh on Capitol Hill. If it were correctly written and up to date, we might actually raise an eyebrow.

Sorry to curdle the milk with truth.

[alan]

For whatever it might be worth, there are problems with the petition, said problems have been mentioned earlier.

Additionally, I e-mailed Mr. Yoder, pointing out the factual errors, errors that I believe I had mentioned in an earlier post. I have not had a response of any kind from Mr. Yoder.

Factual errors that I saw are as follows:

1. The CMP is not selling M-1 Rifles for anything near $100.00, I believe it's more like $500.00, which they might be worth, but that's another matter entirely.

2. The tag end of the petition, as I recall, described a modification routine that would "civilianize" any M-14's that might be sold. Given that selective fire capability had already been modified out of the rifle, by the military, what he described seems unnecessary.
2A. The Ordinance Dept., long ago, came up with a procedure that included the removal/replacement of parts, and as I recall from reading about it, 7 distinct welds. This was intended to preclude "field restoration" of selective fire capability.
2B. Given that the procedure was performed, as specified, I doubt that the rifles could be "readilly restored" to selective fire capability, which would be a violation of existing law anyhow.
2C. It had been observed, years ago, that the M-14, in fullautomatic mode, was virtually uncontrollable, which I believe was the reason for selective fire capability being removed.
2D. Given that the Browning Automatic rifle, then available, was controllable in full automatic mode, that capability in the M-14 seemed to serve no valid purpose.
2E. The original M-14 was supposed to replace both the M-1 and the BAR. It was a good enough rifle of and in itself, but all it accomplished was to replace the M-1.

Readers, feel free to correct any errors that you might find in the above. It remains, in my view, that the past destruction of surplus to needs military small arms, semi-automatics as well as handguns that is, was and remains an unacceptable, politically inspired waste of money, such as should have merited someone being taken out and hung. More likely such waste should have brought about the hanging of a bunch of people. Unfortunately, that didn't happen, which leads to things like the petition in question, poor thing that it might be. That aspect, in my view, is something that should not be forgotten. It is also something that our government should be beaten about the head with.

[Bill St. Clair]

One of GUNED's readers sent a letter to the Pentagon about the destruction of M14s, and received the following reply. Seems to me that this excuse would preclude the entire CMP program.

-Bill St. Clair

===========

http://guned.com/pages/news.htm

Letter Back To GUNED Northwest Radioman From The Pentagon...
6-22-03

Phill19- GUNED Northwest Radioman

I received a reply from Glenn F. Lamartin, Director Defense Systems of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense to a fax I sent to President Bush.

Address letter 3000 Defense Pentagon Washington D.C. 20301-3000

Dear Mr. Lee:

Thank you for your recent letter to President George W. Bush concerning the sale of Department of Defense semi-automatic rifles to civilian citizens.

I understand your concern for the stewardship of our valuable government resources. The Department maintains a life-cycle management process for weapons, including small arms, which provides tight control of over weapons from acquisition through demilitarization. This process, under Department regulations, does not permit the sale of military-use weapons to civilian citizens. Furthermore, the United States is party to a number of international agreements which would make the action you request problematic.

Ideas from concerned citizens are always welcome--thank you for your interest in our national security.

Sincerely,
Glenn F. Lamartin
Director
Defense Systems

[George Hill]

So Glenn F. Lamartin has never heard of the CMP?


Git

[alan]

George Hill:

In your short post, you noted the following:

"So Glenn F. Lamartin has never heard of the CMP?"

Possibly so, but then what can one expect from "civil service" types, or politically appointed bureaucrats, whichever of the two Lamartin might be.

Of course, there is another possibility, which I enter upon with some trepidation.

Amongst what is sometimes known as "the fair sex", you may have noticed a passing strange capability or ability, that of selective hearing/selective vision/selective understanding.

I assume that Mr. Lamartin, by definition, is not a member of "the fair sex", however it is possibile that he somehow has managed to share or acquire, perhaps via "withchcraft", some of their peculiar abilities, those listed above.

He certainly has acquired some facility with that most strange of all lingustic skills, "bureaucratese".

[Intune]

"Furthermore, the United States is party to a number of international agreements which would make the action you request problematic."

YIKES???

Um, which ones specifically ?

[C1PNR]

13300

Errors and all.;)

[Cameron]

http://www.battlerifles.com/viewtopic.php?t=14311