Is there a gun you WON'T buy becasue of its history?


PDA






bigalexe
August 6, 2009, 10:43 AM
This is more of a question for guys that like antique guns but anyone can answer it. I'm curious if there are any of you guys that would decline to purchase a historical firearm because of its history, such as lets say a rifle you know belonged to a guard in a Nazi concentration camp.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is there a gun you WON'T buy becasue of its history?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 10:48 AM
A stolen gun, or one used in a crime.

What's the ill stigma about a Nazi rifle?

highorder
August 6, 2009, 11:01 AM
I dont attach emotional hang-ups to material objects.

Carl
August 6, 2009, 11:03 AM
I'd only decline to buy a historical gun if the person raised the price significantly on it because of the history.

bigalexe
August 6, 2009, 11:04 AM
Ill stigma to me even though im not of Jewish descent or religion is the background on the crimes committed by the Nazis in general. I specified a prison/concentration camp gun because that would mean to me it was very likely used at some point for one or more "executions" in the camps. I don't want that kind of thing hanging around my house.

Yes I know the "blame the person not the gun" argument but somethings in the past are just to potent to ignore.

CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 11:07 AM
...somethings in the past are just to potent to ignore.

If we toss out all the relics, aren't we doing just that?

What better way to remember history than to maintain the artifacts?

It wouldn't be kept to celebrate the Holocaust you know.

deadin
August 6, 2009, 11:15 AM
It wouldn't be kept to celebrate the Holocaust you know.

Unless the owner is a skinhead or Neo-Nazi.:evil:

mcdonl
August 6, 2009, 11:16 AM
I would hope they are not on the high road. :(

bigalexe
August 6, 2009, 11:18 AM
What better way to remember history than to maintain the artifacts?

I believe you may have just budged my opinion, it was loose already.

My thought before is that even though we should not forget the past there are many places more than willing to store things and display them no matter the background. Most of the items on display have nice plaques describing the background so the public can be educated about them (yeah im talking about museums).

However on your side i think the phrase "if you want it done right do it yourself" is pertinent. I think that maybe you or me as an individual preserving that history on our own isnt a bad idea. I guess it prevents the history from being lost because no one wants it.

highorder
August 6, 2009, 11:20 AM
Yes I know the "blame the person not the gun" argument but somethings in the past are just to potent to ignore.

I respectfully disagree.

Material objects are just that.

The have no free will, or memory and should not be punished or treaded with malice.

CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 11:20 AM
Then again, it may be haunted.:D

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 11:27 AM
CoRoMo said it "A stolen gun, or one used in a crime". That about sizes it up for me too.

DHJenkins
August 6, 2009, 11:37 AM
I'll assume the OP meant "historical significance", not simply "history", i.e. stolen or used in a crime.

My answer is no. In fact, owning a piece of history is rather gratifying and can take your imagination to some interesting places.

ThrottleJockey72
August 6, 2009, 11:45 AM
I would even buy a stolen gun or one used in a crime. In fact, I have. From a DNR/police auction.

Officers'Wife
August 6, 2009, 11:54 AM
If you must put the blame, full or part, on the firearm, consider it an act of rehabilitation. Where once it committed such great evil, with Christian love and influence it now contributes to a peaceful society.

Tools are just tools, when we attach the action of the owner on them we lessen the stigma on the criminal. The SS officer my grandfather took his Luger and knife from could very well have been assigned to a camp and those weapons used to commit atrocities during the Nazi rule. Since 1945 neither have been involved in a murder. My Grandfather, may he rest in peace, was a man of good will and good intentions. The SS officer was a man of doubtful morality. They both used the same tool for very different purposes. To paraphrase Shakespeare- the evil is not in our tools but in ourselves. Attaching significance to the past use of the tool implies the current owner is somehow responsible for the acts of the previous owner. A bit of mental gymnastics I fail to understand or accept.

Acera
August 6, 2009, 12:12 PM
I would be happy to liberate any gun that has bad karma associated with it. With a good old exorcism and some Feng shui, I could change it's trail of evil and put it on the path of light.

Remember all those surplus Nazi rifles that were used to secure the freedom of Israel?

CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 12:13 PM
Post #14 takes the cake. That is as good a post as I've ever read.

Thank you!

Tim the student
August 6, 2009, 12:23 PM
I wouldn't buy a stolen one, but I would happily buy one used in a crime or suicide.

That being said, I do stigmatize the Axis weapons, and I wouldn't buy any of those. (Germany and Japan I guess, Italy doesn't count for me). I know its not rational at all, but thats how I feel about it.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 12:40 PM
(Rhetorical question) What would you do with a gun that belonged to Bill Longley or John Wesley Hardin or the James brothers. Maybe "Bloody Bill" Cunningham the notorious Tory. Maybe of pirates like Blackbeard or Morgan. Or maybe a musket used by Spanish Conquistadors slaughtering Montezuma's people? Where would you draw the line?

Just One Shot
August 6, 2009, 12:45 PM
I'm not trying to step on any toes or start a debate but I won't buy one with the Taurus name on it.

They are better than they use to be but they have a stigma about them for me because I remember when they were considered the bottom of the barrel when it came to firearms.

I also won't buy a Highpoint because they have a history of being the ugliest gun on the planet.

SN13
August 6, 2009, 01:09 PM
I won't buy any gun from a gunshop or store that sells 9mm winchester white box at more than $15/bx even in the so called "shortage".

I also won't shoot at or support any ranges that won't allow certain types of guns because they are of a similar type that they fought against in (Insert war here).

Those types of people can kma.

A gun is nothing but metal, wood, plastic etc. Just because a Finn killed Russians with the Mosin that resides in my closet, doesn't mean crap.

PT1911
August 6, 2009, 01:12 PM
NOPE.

PT1911
August 6, 2009, 01:17 PM
I'm not trying to step on any toes or start a debate but I won't buy one with the Taurus name on it.

They are better than they use to be but they have a stigma about them for me because I remember when they were considered the bottom of the barrel when it came to firearms.

I also won't buy a Highpoint because they have a history of being the ugliest gun on the planet.


that is great... only has nothing to do with the question posed... he asked about a singlular gun (not make) and if you would avoid any particular gun (not make) because of what happened in the history of that gun (not make)

avoid a gun because it was used in a murder?
avoid it because it was used to kill americans in war?


and I have to ask. If a gun was used in a crime, processed and then actioned off why would you avoid it?
avoid it because little Timmy got hold of his dad's carelessly placed loaded gun and tragedy ensued?

I would not avoid a gun with bad history. It is not an animal that has had a taste of blood and I dont believe in bad JUJU... if I liked the gun and thought it to be a good deal, it would be mine.

though i have heard of some pretty sick people that collect weapons used in murders (especially those with blood still on them) and obtain proof of such in the form of a death certificate....etc. Pretty much the opposite of the question you have asked.. buying because of the history. Hmmmmm... that could be another thread altogether.

CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 01:26 PM
What would you do with a gun that belonged to Bill Longley or John Wesley Hardin or the James brothers. Maybe "Bloody Bill" Cunningham the notorious Tory. Maybe of pirates like Blackbeard or Morgan. Or maybe a musket used by Spanish Conquistadors slaughtering Montezuma's people?

I'd take it to Antiques Roadshow and have William Guthman or J. Christopher Mitchell give me their appraisal. I'd then make a youtube video of the appraisal and include a link to that video on the Gunbroker auction. Highest bidder wins. That's just because I don't collect old guns at all. But it's not because I'm scared of a gun that some evil dude used to own. I just don't have a use for a mosin or any other old gun. And I don't think less of an owner who has acquired a relic like that; whether that owner be a museum or a collector.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 01:35 PM
I think I would have to give them(on LOAN of course) to the NRA's Firearms Museum. If I were to sell any such firearms it most certainly would not be on Gunbroker.com. I would sell through a reputable auction house. I would have NO problem owning them because of how they had been used.

Owen Sparks
August 6, 2009, 01:40 PM
Inanimate objects have no capacity for volition, either good or evil. Objects can however, become very powerful symbols that trigger emotions in some people. There is a technique used in hypnosis called anchoring where the hypnotist gets the subject to associate strong feelings, either positive or negative, with a symbol of some sort. Then later on he can get the subject back in that state of mind by using the symbol or "firing the anchor". Think of Pavlov's dog who was conditioned to associate a bell ringing with dinner. Bells have nothing to do with food but in the dogs mind it did. Watch a good trial lawyer work a jury. If he can't get a judgment based on the facts he will go straight for the emotions. A phrase like "The Children" is a prime example. It bypasses the critical factor in some people and they reflexively respond with emotions of dread and fear of anything that might harm a child. Throw that phrase into an argument at the right time, like when the jury is being shown "exhibit A" and from then on some people will experience negative feelings every time they see exhibit A and they wont even know why! This is exactly how many people become anti-gun. They have seen guns presented in negative ways by TV, movies and the news for so long that a gun has become a symbol for crime and violence. If you are the emotional sort, an old Mauser could very easily become a very powerful symbol that brings up negative feelings associated with the Holocaust. It is not a far stretch for some people to project these feelings onto ALL guns. So NO, there is not a gun I would not own because of its past misuse because I understand on a logical level that it is just a thing. I also understand the quirk of human behavior that causes some people to attach fear and loathing to things.

Officers'Wife
August 6, 2009, 01:48 PM
What would you do with a gun that belonged to Bill Longley or John Wesley Hardin or the James brothers. Maybe "Bloody Bill" Cunningham the notorious Tory. Maybe of pirates like Blackbeard or Morgan. Or maybe a musket used by Spanish Conquistadors slaughtering Montezuma's people? Where would you draw the line?

Interesting, by the same token should there be a 'taint' on my 4th great-grandfather's Walker handgun since it was used in a war against Americans? Or going to the 'what if' realm, had Hitler been shot by a sniper in, say 1939, should that rifle also have a taint? What about the weapons that started the fire at the Branch Davidian complex in Waco? Or the rifles issued to the National Guardsmen at Kent State back in ancient times? Or going further back the Gatling and small arms used at the original Wounded Knee massacre? Or the rifles and cannon used to take Fort Pillow?

Someone wiser than I once told me that people prefer to blame the tools used in a horrible atrocity as a means to keep from accepting that there are human beings low enough to commit such crimes. Perhaps, the whole question asked isn't a sign of blaming the weapon but the inability to accept the unspeakable evil that exists in the hearts and minds of men. In the case of Nazi and Indian war weapons the atrocities are even harder to accept as it was believed the murders were in the best interests of society. Perhaps it's time to take these evils out of the dark corners and examine them closely so we can recognize them in ourselves and change our attitudes lest we become another black mark of history.


(Note to mods: Please forgive my thread drift. )

Lakeshore
August 6, 2009, 01:56 PM
I have a 9mm Luger that a deceased WWII army officer relative of mine brought home from Germany. Would I buy another one, knowing that it could have been used to shoot an innocent person or even one of our guys? Doubtful. But I'll never part with this one. Aside from the sentimental factor it's an absolute marvel of handgun engineering. The close tolerances of the toggle bolt mechanism are just not present in modern firearms.

CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 01:59 PM
Good point. How many of us collect Native American arrowheads or spearheads? If it was picked up from a spot where a battle took place, who cares? There are hundreds of people in the south that collect Civil War bullets and swords that were dug out of a farmer's cornfield.

Just One Shot
August 6, 2009, 02:07 PM
that is great... only has nothing to do with the question posed... he asked about a singlular gun (not make) and if you would avoid any particular gun (not make) because of what happened in the history of that gun (not make)

Title asked:
Is there a gun that you won't buy because of it's history?

That's a pretty general question that can be addressed in many ways.

I answered it the way I did because I won't purchase ANY of the guns by those two makers because of their history!

As I stated, I wasn't trying to start a debate or step on any toes.

Commander Crusty
August 6, 2009, 02:16 PM
I will never buy a Browning handgun again. Had one. Jammed. They wouldn't fix it. Said I "modified" it (I did not). Sent gun back to me dirty and greasy. I'll probably never buy ANY browning product--ever.

CWL
August 6, 2009, 02:31 PM
I have been to genocide and mass murder sites in Europe and SE Asia. I have visited active dig sites where people are still cataloging and removing human remains from the soil. What was done in these places was pure evil.

There is a clear distinction between weapons used by troops to conduct war against enemy combatants and weapons used to conduct atrocities. Fortunately, these are usually separate and identifiable groups of men armed with separate weapons .

Weapons used for atrocities will never enter my home.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 02:45 PM
HEY!!! Ancient times my Aunt Fanny! I was a senior in high school in 1970!

BLACKHAWKNJ
August 6, 2009, 02:50 PM
Define "stolen". GI bringbacks are "stolen", war booty is "stolen".

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 03:02 PM
"To the victor go the spoils"

MrFox
August 6, 2009, 03:07 PM
So you are telling me you wouldn't want a cannon from Blackbeard's ship? COME ONNN!!! I'd be all over that.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 03:10 PM
I think they recently found Blackbeard's flagship. All of his cannon are accounted for.

KBintheSLC
August 6, 2009, 03:13 PM
I won't buy another Smith & Wesson because they had a great 150 year history, and defecated all over it by producing a bunch of lemons lately.

Gryffydd
August 6, 2009, 03:15 PM
Weapons used for atrocities will never enter my home.
Are you afraid they're haunted? Or what precisely?
What if you pick up an old milsurp weapon...how are you going to know what it was used for? What if you have one that was used for an atrocity but you don't know it? Do you just avoid all surplus weapons?

CoRoMo
August 6, 2009, 03:27 PM
Gryffydd...

I figure that's his choice, and I respect that.

But CWL, if a friend of yours brings over a Luger to show you, and tells you it was issued to an SS guard at Ravensbrueck, how would you react? Scream and point in horror?

Gryffydd
August 6, 2009, 03:29 PM
I figure that's his choice, and I respect that.

Agreed. I'm just genuinely curious as to the motivations, and how exactly he carries out that choice given the mostly unknown histories of old military guns.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 03:33 PM
My ex-father-in-law took a Dryse .32 auto pistol from a German officer in WWII. The officer (a colonel I think) was in line with other prisoners. My ex-F-I-L noticed him limping and ordered him to remove his boots. The little auto was hidden in his boot. My ex-F-I-L had it nickle plated is Switzerland before coming home. My ex-brother-in-law inherited it at the passing of his dad. Was it used to execute innocents? Who can say?

Scoupe
August 6, 2009, 03:50 PM
I used to have a 'bnz' marked K98k Mauser. It was made at the Mathausen concentration camp(s) by inmates. I didn't like having it around because of the association with slave labor and death camps, and moved it to someone who wasn't bothered by that.

To each his own I guess.

Gryffydd
August 6, 2009, 03:55 PM
For some reason I do find a weapon whose making was an atrocity to be more disturbing that one whose possible use was a possible atrocity.

Erik M
August 6, 2009, 04:13 PM
I wont buy older revolvers because of the empty chamber under the hammer rule. I would never own a snub nose pistol because I like to be able to hit targets that are far away.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 04:14 PM
This may be a stretch but if a rifle such as you described were made by slave labor in a concentration camp. And that rifle was made for evil purposes. Many years later if that same rifle was given a benign and peaceful role maybe even a beneficial role to society. Would not those who had no choice in the making of the rifle now be vindicated? That is to say that, that which was intended for evil was now used to honor those that were forced to make it. Just asking.

nwilliams
August 6, 2009, 04:17 PM
The only time wouldn't want a gun is if I knew it was used in a suicide. I have a real issue with suicide and wouldn't want a gun associated with such an event. The same holds true with places I live, I could never live in a house or apartment if a suicide or murder took place there.

Guns used to kill in wartime don't bother me in the least. However murder and especially suicide guns are for others to own, not me.

mcdonl
August 6, 2009, 04:18 PM
I wont buy older revolvers because of the empty chamber under the hammer rule. I would never own a snub nose pistol because I like to be able to hit targets that are far away.

Could you elaborate? I understand that some people used to (Still do) carry with an empty chamber under the hammer, but other then within a given agency I never knew it was a rule. I carry with all chambers loaded.

I guess it all depends on what you mean by far away... far away for me is not going to be hit by ANY handgun.

Scoupe
August 6, 2009, 04:22 PM
Jimmy Ray,

Thoughtful idea. I imagine the answer to that would be different depending on who you asked. Some would take the position that no, it couldn't shed the cloud it was created under. I'm trying to imagine what that benign and peaceful role would be, but I won't deny that it is a possiblity. It certainly wasn't fulfilling that role in my gun safe however, and I'm probably not going to open a holocaust museum/memorial anytime soon. It made me uneasy, so I moved it.

kd7nqb
August 6, 2009, 04:26 PM
As far as war relics I dont have a problem with any of them. As far as stolen guns I would never buy a gun that its known to be stolen. As far as guns in crimes, I had the opportunity I dont think I would have a problem with it. I know of somebody who's first gun he received by flooring the gas when he was car jacked, gun flew into the back seat and he never called the cops. Not saying I condone not calling the cops just saying I know stuff like that happens.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 04:36 PM
Scoupe,I understand. It was just a thought. Trying to salvage something from the tragedy that was concetration camps.

Cosmoline
August 6, 2009, 04:38 PM
such as lets say a rifle you know belonged to a guard in a Nazi concentration camp.

Establishing that level of provenance on any milsurp is extremely difficult if not impossible. If you have a clear written attestation from the GI who actually took it from the guard, that would be one way. But that's pretty rare. You can narrow down some of the Finns to a Civil Guard district and even call the former owners of the Schmidt-Rubins, but those are small nations that kept good records and didn't exactly have a lot of atrocities. The best you can usually do are capture marks or particular property stamps. I'm not aware of any concentration camp guard marks, but if you COULD establish that level of provenance with a particular firearm it would be a real museum piece and well worth preserving.

The same holds true with places I live, I could never live in a house or apartment if a suicide or murder took place there.

There's really no way of knowing either in most cases. I had an old Spanish pistol with rust patterns in the shape of blood splash, as if from a very close head shot. But really who cares? It's just a pistol and if the guy shot himself with it that's his problem, not mine. Maybe he had good reason to.

If you live in an older house it's sometimes interesting to take one of those lights around that shows blood marks even through paint. OTOH maybe that's not such a good idea ;-)

Coyote3855
August 6, 2009, 05:32 PM
Quote:
I wont buy older revolvers because of the empty chamber under the hammer rule. I would never own a snub nose pistol because I like to be able to hit targets that are far away.

Could you elaborate? I understand that some people used to (Still do) carry with an empty chamber under the hammer, but other then within a given agency I never knew it was a rule. I carry with all chambers loaded.

I think he's referring to Colt/Colt Clone/early Ruger Single Actions that should be carried with the hammer down on an empty chamber. Later Rugers (Blackhawks and Vaqueros old and new) have a transfer bar under the hammer and can safely be carried with six beans in the wheel. Don't know that it was ever a "rule," just a damn good idea.

Acera
August 6, 2009, 05:38 PM
Now a lot of you are sounding just like the anit's!!

That gun is bad...............

That gun is product of evil..............





Come on, we use the phrases like "it is just a tool, how you use it depends on the user" to say guns aren't bad.


I have no issues with someone not wanting to be associated with a particular inanimate object. I find it amusing that staunch gun rights advocates will sometimes preach the same line of crud as the opposition. LOL

CWL
August 6, 2009, 05:51 PM
Are you afraid they're haunted? Or what precisely?
What if you pick up an old milsurp weapon...how are you going to know what it was used for? What if you have one that was used for an atrocity but you don't know it? Do you just avoid all surplus weapons?

Did I write that? No. Am I telling you what to do? No.

I would buy the pistol that A. Hitler shot himself with, or the pistol used to assassinate ArchDuke Ferdinand to start WWI if I could. I'd love to own Audie Murphy's Garand -and he killed dozens of enemies with his rifle. These are items of historical significance. I currently own weapons picked-up in the field of battle, either from dead or surrendered enemy.

I only referred to weapons used for atrocities. Historically, countries like German, Japan and all sides fighting in former Yugoslavia and in SE Asia had specialized units that performed mass murder. These guys were quite proud of their actions and meticulously recorded their deeds, and oftentimes their weapons had unit markings to identify them.

The weapons of these units were not used with honor, nor were they used in war, I have no interest in them.

Gryffydd
August 6, 2009, 06:04 PM
Did I write that? No. Am I telling you what to do? No.
Did I say you wrote that? No. ;)
So...you like milsurp, but won't own any German or Japanese etc. weapons due to the possibility that they were used in an atrocity? Or you avoid only the ones you are able to determine were used in such a way?

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 06:16 PM
The assasination of Archduke Ferdinand started WWI not WWII. Just sayin'.

CWL
August 6, 2009, 06:34 PM
So...you like milsurp, but won't own any German or Japanese etc. weapons due to the possibility that they were used in an atrocity? Or you avoid only the ones you are able to determine were used in such a way?

You still don't seem to understand more than what you want to. Did I write "possibility"?

Certain weapons have unit markings on them, these are the ones I have no interest in.

Look up Einsatzgruppen, EinsatzKommando, or SS-Totenkopfverbände. These guys weren't warriors, they let others fight and die on the battlefields while they spent WWII behind the lines committing genocide and mass murder. Why would I want something only used for dishonor? They would be as horrific to own as a death camp oven to me.

As I've already written, I have personally been to atrocity sites, several under active investigation. I have been brought to a tree where ~2,000 babies had their brains bashed-out and dumped, and their only crime was because their parents were suspected of treasonous beliefs. It has been mostly cleared of bones and clothing scraps now, and the site looks very peaceful and quiet -would you want to have a picnic under that tree?

CWL
August 6, 2009, 06:43 PM
The assasination of Archduke Ferdinand started WWI not WWII. Just sayin'.

Whoops! Thanks for the assist. I've got to proof-read more.

jimmyraythomason
August 6, 2009, 06:48 PM
How about a Japanese officer's sword? Those were used in combat but beheading pows and chinese(among others) civilians was their primary fuction.

61chalk
August 6, 2009, 06:48 PM
I wouldn't own any gun that had killed someone I loved. Is that putting emotion
into a object, or a tool....?...probably, but I don't believe emotion is a bad thing.
I just can't see telling someone that the gun I own killed my Dad, or best friend..it wouldn't matter what brand or kind it was or what war it was in. But if it had been in that crime, most likely that cops hopefully would have it an destroy it, although one local cop didn't destroy a gun used in murder, stole it, sold it to his best friend, whose son got it an killed a cop......

sniper5
August 6, 2009, 06:49 PM
As long as it's obtained through legal channels-no.

travellingJeff
August 6, 2009, 06:57 PM
I still don't understand this chain of idiocy here. Certain people are just emotionally blinded by the mention of the "Holocaust" and have no desire to discuss anything related to it rationally.

That said, if the weapon functioned well, I wouldn't care it's origin, manufacture or history.

OP - Are you a Jew? I only ask because I own weapons that were used against "my people" and have no problem with it. I am blend of German, Irish and Italian. In WWII both grandfathers fought, one in North Africa and one in Europe. I've no problems with possessing a Mauser, nor a Garand, nor a Mosin-Nagant. The odds exist that the Mauser, and certainly my grandfathers bring-back Luger from a "liberated" SS officer, were used to kill some Allied trooper at some point in time. The Garands I own could have been used to kill distant relatives on my German or Italian side. I have no ill will towards any of these implements simply because of the action of an individual possessing them decades ago.

It's just a machine, no more, no less.

doc2rn
August 6, 2009, 06:59 PM
I wouldnt buy:
Phoenix Arms
Jennings
Raven
Pretty much any stamped gun and/or a
TAURUS! They got the 3 strikes with a Titanium .357 cylinder crack, 9mm they wouldnt repair, and a .17 instant back up that was at repair more often than I had it in my posession (had it 9 days in 2 yrs).

CWL
August 6, 2009, 07:04 PM
How about a Japanese officer's sword? Those were used in combat but beheading pows and chinese(among others) civilians was their primary fuction.

I have one, supposedly picked-up on Okinawa (memorabilia auction). Besides, by the time Americans were picking-up Japanese souvenirs, most of the Japanese units responsible for atrocities had been destroyed, or were posted in China & SE Asia.

However, I wouldn't consider a rifle or bayonet issued to the Japanese Kwantung Army. They used captured soldiers for live bayonet practice, killed prisoners & civilians for sport and buried people alive by the hundreds of thousands.

Officers'Wife
August 6, 2009, 07:07 PM
Hi NWilliams,

The only time wouldn't want a gun is if I knew it was used in a suicide. I have a real issue with suicide and wouldn't want a gun associated with such an event. The same holds true with places I live, I could never live in a house or apartment if a suicide or murder took place there.

I'm curious, over in White County there is an old building where a man hanged himself in the 40's. Said building is now used to store & sort potatoes for market. Would you have problems eating the potatoes knowing that bit of history? In Cass County there is a barn where a county sheriff was shot to death in the 30's. Would you have problems eating beef from the cattle that live in that barn now?

Selena

KenWP
August 6, 2009, 07:10 PM
Freind of mine is a city of Calgary policeman and he used to get a lot of guns when he was the firearms officer that he bought off widows and guys that had beat a charge and figured they should get rid of their guns before they got in more trouble. He sold me a 22 revolver once that turned out to be used in a armed robbery and he tried to see me a Model 94 30-30 one night. The price was right untill he said he bought it off a widow and it had only fired 1 shot. I put it down and told him no deal on that one. Just didn't feel right to buy it after that.

Gryffydd
August 6, 2009, 07:10 PM
would you want to have a picnic under that tree?
I sure wouldn't make a special trip to have a picnic under that tree.
If I were to have a picnic under that tree without knowing its history, would I be in any way harmed? I'm sure you can find a whole lot of places where at some point in earth's history atrocities have happened.
That's my yardstick. If I were to not know the special circumstances of a place/weapon, would I be harmed by owning it? If not, then I don't worry about it. If I eat a berry in the woods that I don't know is poisonous, it'll still make me sick. If I live in an apartment or have a picnic under a tree and I have no idea something bad happened there, I won't be affected in any way.

But that's just me. I'm not saying that's the way anybody else should be. But then I also try to avoid beliefs and ideas if I can't explain them fully without getting upset and defensive.

Erik M
August 6, 2009, 07:18 PM
I have a a cousin that rebuilds near-totaled automobiles purchased through insurance companies and sells them at a decent mark. He is also the go-to flatbed guy for local law enforcement to clean up wrecks. He sells rebuilt cars in which people 'diddt make it' for lack of a better phrase. Hes sold several and just tells the people that they were bought at auction and he dosent know the history.


I think not owning a gun based on what another individual did with it is attatching emotions to an inadimate object. I guess its karma or some such nonsense.

Officers'Wife
August 6, 2009, 07:22 PM
Hi Scoupe,

I'm trying to imagine what that benign and peaceful role would be, but I won't deny that it is a possiblity. It certainly wasn't fulfilling that role in my gun safe however, and I'm probably not going to open a holocaust museum/memorial anytime soon.

While I understand on an emotional level, I can't help but believe having the words "Never Again" engraved on the weapon would make it a powerful symbol. One of the old timey TV shows my Dad watches reruns of (Twilight Zone) had an episode where the commandant of Dachau returned to the camp. At the end of that episode one of the actors asked 'Why does it still stand?' (Meaning the camp) Mr Sterlings' monologue after pointed out that we need for the Dachaus and the Baden Badens and Auschwitzes to always remain as a stark reminder of how evil an out of control society can be.

As a passing thought, I wonder how many Chinese import rifles are made by Red Army prisoners. Something to think about when you admire that SKS?

AKElroy
August 6, 2009, 07:29 PM
I would not buy anything stolen or broken. Other than that, I find history, even negative history, to be a point of interest. Speculation about the battles an issued weapon may have seen is part of what drives my desire for milsurp purchases, even rifles clearly issued to the bad guys.

tju1973
August 6, 2009, 07:38 PM
Yeah-- a good friend and coworker was selling a Glock 22 for $250 that his son used to commit suicide with once it was released by the PD-- it was a good gun, but I knew his son since he was a kid, and the death hit me hard. The gun was a good one, and would buy one any other time at that price-- but I just couldn't bring myself to buy that one. Another coworker's brother has a pawn (an ethical one) shop-- we contacted him, and he bought the Glock off my friend for $450 (the pistol was practically new)- -and the money all went to my friends grandson....

CWL
August 6, 2009, 09:30 PM
But that's just me. I'm not saying that's the way anybody else should be. But then I also try to avoid beliefs and ideas if I can't explain them fully without getting upset and defensive.

I think we can agree that each is welcome to their opinions. I have my belief system and I'm not trying to ram it down anybody else's throat. My philosophy is based on personal experiences that I've been fortunate enough (or unfortunate) to have had the time and means to see. I know what I would and would not do and why.

This is just an internet discussion, we've been asked to share opinions.

gun addict
August 6, 2009, 09:53 PM
i grew up in China and seen far too many sites of Japanese atrocities, so nope, i will never have an Arisaka in my house depite the fact that they are good rifles

Ruggles
August 6, 2009, 09:54 PM
I am with you on this CWL, no desire at all to own and preserve a weapons used to kill American soldiers in any war. I would not own a firearm used in a concentration camp either.

Just a personal choice really.

outlander0129
August 6, 2009, 09:58 PM
The only gun that wouldn't be allowed in my house, is the one the punk just stole from my neighbor or his neighbor. Remember,,,,the human factor caused the atrocities, not the weapons.




As long as I breathe, I will be free.

KenWP
August 6, 2009, 10:06 PM
A lot of the tools and what ever made in China are made in forced labour camps or prisons also.
We all have the right to different ideas that's why the US has the Consitutuion worded the way it is. I am not really superstitious but I do have a sense of right and wrong when it comes to some objects. Buying any milsurplus object and not just a gun could have been used for what ever purpose it was used for. I for one bought a Reichsmark bill and store it in on purpose in my Lodge bible since they sent us to concentration camps also. Sometimes we can use these objects for a better purpose.

Joe Demko
August 6, 2009, 10:39 PM
I don't fetishize murder or evil. Nazi guns, Bolshevik guns, or other guns belonging to famous killers have precisely zero allure to me. Dillinger's Remington derringer recently sold for a breathtaking sum. To me, that gun would have been worth no more than any other Remington derringer in the same condition.
Further, preserving weapons used by famous killers is not preserving history. If every Mauser and every Mosin-Nagant disappeared from American gunsafes tonight, it would not cause the memories of Nazi and Bolshevik horrors to disappear. They carry no guilt, but neither do they carry any stories

Ky Larry
August 6, 2009, 10:53 PM
My great uncle had a S&W Triple Lock .44 special that a neighbor use to kill a federal revenue agent in 1931. Uncle Ben shot and enjoyed that pistol for over 50 years and it held no stigma.

ThrottleJockey72
August 6, 2009, 10:57 PM
My great uncle had a S&W Triple Lock .44 special that a neighbor use to kill a federal revenue agent in 1931.
NICE!!!:)

bigalexe
August 7, 2009, 12:02 AM
OP - Are you a Jew? I only ask because I own weapons that were used against "my people" and have no problem with it. I am blend of German, Irish and Italian.

I would direct you to post #5 in which i state i am not of Jewish descent or religion. As it happens I am just about everything west of a line drawn from Germany to Serbia and then down to the Mediterranean sea. I currently reside in Michigan and consider myself American, my dad's side can only trace their routes back to the guy that walked off the boat (sometime pre-revolution) onto US Soil, but our last name is German.

Anyway this is shaping up to be a very interesting discussion. I have to agree I personally would not wish to own a suicide gun, or one used in a cold blooded murder, just as I would not own a rope, fire poker, or place of residence in which either had occurred.

JWF III
August 7, 2009, 12:32 AM
Quote:
...somethings in the past are just to potent to ignore.

If we toss out all the relics, aren't we doing just that?

What better way to remember history than to maintain the artifacts?

It wouldn't be kept to celebrate the Holocaust you know.


The Concentration Camps are some of the biggest tourist spots in Germany. Are all the visitor racist?

If the artifacts aren't kept up, history will be forgotten. The guns had nothing to do with the decesion making. They didn't fire without be forced to do so. I have quite a few German (Nazi marked) and Japanese firearms and memorabilia. Don't know what their role was in the war. Yes I'd love to know, but that likelihood is slim, and it wouldn't change a thing (other than it's story).

I am of German ancestory with a little French, Swiss, and Native American. I own American arms, Russian arms, French arms, British arms and German arms. All of which were used against my "people". I hold no ill will to them.

I am American by birth. I own those listed above, as well as Italian arms and Japanese Arms. All (with exception of Brit. and French) were used against my family and countrymen. I hold no ill will to them.

I am a carpenter by trade. My 28 oz Estwing has gotten my thumb many time over the 12+ years I've owned it. I hold no ill will to it. I have saws that have cut people, and nail guns that have shot people. I hold no ill will to them.

A tool is just that, a tool. It cannot do anything without a person directing it to do it. If guns with history aren't your thing, so be it. But many milsurps have blood on them. They may not be for you. (Which is good. That just leaves more for me:D.)

Wyman

Deus Machina
August 7, 2009, 12:52 AM
I wouldn't buy a Nazi gun.

Nothing against the guns, just not a major fan of the guns from most of those places from that era.

Maybe something mechanically significant, or one in great shape for a great price. Just like any other gun, but if a seller tells me "this one was never issued, but this one's in perfect shape and shot old men in the back of the head" I'm... Well, really, I'm going to steer clear of that seller. But I'd also rather have the unissued one. For the same price (or far less, knowing dealers), why not?

No ill will toward the weapon, but I'd rather buy a gun despite it being used for ill will and never brag about it, than buy one because of it.

paintballdude902
August 7, 2009, 12:59 AM
im iffy on buying a nazi weapon being polish i had alot of family lost in the war and alot of family that was in auschwitz as well as in the british military polish military and the polish underground

but at th esame time i feel so connected to the war that i find im ofton drawn to these weapons

Roc_Kor
August 7, 2009, 01:01 AM
Food for thought: If being anywhere where atrocities (your definition of "atrocity" may vary based on size of an event) occurred bothers you, then you really can only limit yourself to living in small portions of the earth. Heck, you could argue that much of North America is an "atrocity zone" because of the way Native Americans were treated by early settlers, then how slaves were treated for about 200 years, plus 100 more years of Jim Crow and Segregation.

As long as their are humans, there is evil, and there are tools used for that evil, and places for that evil to occur.

Would I own a Mauser Kar98k knowing it was used by Nazis? Probably, as long as the rifle is of good quality. If I found out it WAS used in during the Holocaust, it'd bother me for a bit, but I'm sure I'd get over it after putting it to good use.

Isher
August 7, 2009, 01:29 AM
So much for political threads on this forum.

I started to write, tonight, re this subject, then dumped it.

I thought this was the high road.

Someone please explain.

Apparently I don't have the magic decoder ring.


isher

Oyeboten
August 7, 2009, 01:40 AM
I have passsed on old Guns I would have loved to own, where the individual example at hand somehow had a 'vibe' which was not a good fit for me.

I have bought old Guns which were basically unremarkable, but whose ineffable 'vibe' was somehow very appealing.


Same with old Cars, Tools, Machinery of all sorts...every one of which is an individual Artefact, with a unique History and unique prior ownership(s)...however unknown those maybe.


On principle, I have shied away from anything 'communist'...but that's about it far as politics entering into it.

2RCO
August 7, 2009, 02:18 AM
Suicide guns make me cringe...I know that the gun had nothing to do with it but I don't want to know about it. I've passed up a good deal or two because of this. I also wouldn't want a gun used in a murder because I want to admire and enjoy the gun and not think about some poor guy or gal that got their ticket punched by some miscreant.

IMHO the guys that collect bloodstain damaged guns have issues-- but they can do as they wish...

I am sure out of all the millsurps and 1911's I own that one or more has probably been used in taking a life and this doesn't bug me because I don't know. Nazi guns don't excite me but don't bother me. Since the Nazi's lost the guns are trophies of Good and I do believe we should never forget the evil they did. I've seen a few Israeli guns where the waffenampts were overstamped with the star of David always thought they were the best example of a gun as a tool.

Basically buy what you like but I'll pass on known suicide and murder guns. For a short time I couldn't pick up a 12GA pump because a good friend did himself in with one. It wasn't the pump but the thoughts of my buddies ultimate bad choice that they brought to mind. As time passed I was able to get past it and shoot my pumps. I'm not giving guns any mystical ties but rather saying that objects can remind us of things that make us uncomfortable.

nwilliams
August 7, 2009, 02:44 AM
I'm curious, over in White County there is an old building where a man hanged himself in the 40's. Said building is now used to store & sort potatoes for market. Would you have problems eating the potatoes knowing that bit of history? In Cass County there is a barn where a county sheriff was shot to death in the 30's. Would you have problems eating beef from the cattle that live in that barn now?

There's a big difference between what you're describing and an object that somebody used to end their own life.

Oro
August 7, 2009, 04:33 AM
had a S&W Triple Lock .44 special that a neighbor use to kill a federal revenue agent in 1931.

Hell, in my family we'd make that gun a talisman and love it. But then, my family and I are also from Kentucky. ;)

heck, if it's for sale, e-mail me!

I wouldn't buy a Nazi gun.

Nothing against the guns, just not a major fan of the guns from most of those places from that era.

I agree. I have so many times seen wonderful deals on Nazi marked guns. I don't want them. I'm not Jewish, but so many friends of mine are. Besides the Jewish factor, so many other people I know and grew up with fought them. It was evil, it was pure evil, and no matter how you try to justify that "an inanimate object has no values," that's a lie. It's still a symbol, and it was made to serve an end.

I looked at a Nazi Walther P-38 just last month for a song - I could have made $400 on it in a week. It was not worth it to me to have it in my hands or in my home.

If your ethics aren't as strong, go for it! Some of us who like and love guns still have the capacity to think.

oldfool
August 7, 2009, 06:37 AM
although my head agrees with those who say "no" (firearms are just inanimate objects), my heart says "yes, somewhere, I draw the line"

I don't know where that line is, cannot name offhand some specific make/model I would not own due to such historical reasons, just that there is a line there somewhere

firearms are inanimate objects, but people are not
people are not just "thinking machines"

extreme example - flags are just inanimate objects, too, just cloth
but it will be a cold, cold day in %## when you see a Nazi flag on my front porch

they belong in museums, so people do not forget
they do not belong on my porch or on my living room wall
how it is
I don't have to rationalize it

most of the inanimate objects in our lives are also "symbols", large or small, fair or foul, for better or worse
that ring on milady's finger is just an object, but it means a whole lot more than that to me

Officers'Wife
August 7, 2009, 11:07 AM
Hi Paintballdude,

im iffy on buying a nazi weapon being polish i had alot of family lost in the war and alot of family that was in auschwitz as well as in the british military polish military and the polish underground

Just to play devils advocate here, what if you found a 'Nazi' weapon that had been used by a member of the Polish Underground? I'm not trying to cheapen your beliefs, I'm truly curious of the limits of your reactions.

Officers'Wife
August 7, 2009, 11:12 AM
Hi Nwilliams,

There's a big difference between what you're describing and an object that somebody used to end their own life.

In the case of the suicide, the rope was tied a rafter making the building itself the object used for suicide as it was used as the scaffolding. Again, I'm not trying to be argumentative only trying to understand your POV.

JWF III
August 7, 2009, 02:25 PM
but it will be a cold, cold day in %## when you see a Nazi flag on my front porch


So am I racist because I have a (original) Nazi Swastika Flag hanging in my gunroom, behind the German WWII rifles? What about the Rising Sun behind the Arisakas? Confederate Battle Flag behind the (original) 2 band Enfield?

There is a lot more to it than just having it. If the person carries the same hate that the flag/gun represented in it's past, that is a completely different story. Just owning and preserving a part of a dark time period is nothing but preserving history. It is education for the future generations.

I see you're from GA also "oldfool". Did you live here during the fight for changing the state flag? The old flag showed rememberance to the state's history. Many people were denouncing that fact, and calling it a racist flag, and hate filled. Those same people (IMO) were turning their back on their own history.

It doesn't matter what side you ancestors were on, it's still a part of your history.

Wyman

Joe Demko
August 7, 2009, 02:54 PM
Please expand on how displaying that flag preserves history or educates a fellow. From my POV, absent you there to verbally explain your little display, the whole shebang is going to be interpreted differently by every viewer. The flag and the guns tell no stories. A person unacquainted with the evils of the Nazis cannot look at your display and learn anything from it.
War relics do not preserve history. A P-38 can tell you nothing about the Holocaust. A Mosin-Nagant can tell you nothing about the Holodomor. People preserve history in their memories and their writings.
What matters about the relics is your attitude in having it. Are you keeping that flag to memorialize the Holocaust or to gloat over it? Do you get tingly over Dillinger's derringer because he was a famous murderer?
Once again, all these guns could disappear this instant and the memories would still be here.

Oyeboten
August 7, 2009, 03:21 PM
John Dillinger was not 'a famous murderer'...he was a notorious Armed Robber, famous for NOT murdering or killing anyone.

Joe Demko
August 7, 2009, 03:32 PM
People were killed as part of his criminal activity; he shares responsibility. Make all the excuses for him you want and he'll still be famous scumbag.

ArmedBear
August 7, 2009, 03:36 PM
im iffy on buying a nazi weapon being polish i had alot of family lost in the war and alot of family that was in auschwitz as well as in the british military polish military and the polish underground

----------------

Just to play devils advocate here, what if you found a 'Nazi' weapon that had been used by a member of the Polish Underground? I'm not trying to cheapen your beliefs, I'm truly curious of the limits of your reactions.

Nazi weapons were just following orders.

JWF III
August 7, 2009, 04:21 PM
Once again, all these guns could disappear this instant and the memories would still be here.

(In my best kid voice), "Daddy (or Grandaddy), what is this?" While the child points at some old relic.

With nothing there to prompt the childs curiosity, they question will never be asked. The child will never learn. And history will soon be forgotten.

Case in point, history was taken more for granted in the late 19th Century and early 20th than it is now. Many relics from the Civil War found there way into wells and buried any number of other places. Many of the "hand me down" stories were never told, and thus lost forever. Out of all my ancestors that had a part in the Civil War (on both sides), the only personal story I've been told was that my great-great grandfather, at the age of 10, was taken prisoner of war by Sherman's army as they headed north through SC. He was suposedly spying on them at their camp, a couple miles behind the line at that particular battle.

Another case in point. Look at the history books of today. Everything says that the Civil War (I prefer to refer to it as the War of Northern Aggression) was being fought over slavery. Absolutely false. South Carolina (followed by other Southern States) seceded from the Union because they thought that the Federal Gov't was overstepping it's bounds into what the States saw as something that should be governed by the States. You'll never hear that in a high school classroom. And rarely hear it in a college classroom.

(The same thing is going on now between state gov'ts nationwide and the Fed. gov't. Search it, there is a thread here on THR about it.)

I do not have an ounce of hate, for any group as a whole, in my body. But I will display relics from the past.And anybody that wants to learn the true history (not the PC correct garbage coming from schools today), I will teach it to them.

Wyman

ArmedBear
August 7, 2009, 04:26 PM
South Carolina (followed by other Southern States) seceded from the Union because they thought that the Federal Gov't was overstepping it's bounds into what the States saw as something that should be governed by the States.

"Something", which was....

I actually think that the states of the South had every right to secede and form their own confederacy. Were that "something", something other than slavery, there would have been zero real support in the North, for stopping them from doing so.

I've always found the guerillas from Missouri, who had little if anything to do with slavery, to be more sympathetic characters than their opponents from Kansas, though.

Lincoln, who sent men to kill and be killed in order "to preserve the Union", and specifically NOT to free slaves, was, himself, a villain, though -- slavery notwithstanding.

All told, I think we're best off not re-fighting our great-great-grandfathers' wars -- of course that includes the PC crap as well.

Xader
August 7, 2009, 04:42 PM
Weapons used for atrocities will never enter my home.

They will enter mine! So will guns used in crimes...

Reason?

Because once in my home, I know they'll never be used for such again...

Joe Demko
August 7, 2009, 05:40 PM
(In my best kid voice), "Daddy (or Grandaddy), what is this?" While the child points at some old relic.

You undermined your own point on this. You told me, basically, that relics preserve family folklore. That is not at all the same thing as preserving history. Case in point: I've been shown countless WWII relics that all had virtually the exact same folktale attached to them. "Daddy/Papaw/Uncle Seth took it off a dead German." If the item in question is a pistol, change that to "took it off a German officer."
Now, even a little research will show that American soldiers in WWII (and Korea and Vietnam and...) had a vigorous souvenier market amongst themselves. Stuff got traded back and forth and just plain bought and sold outright. Why have I never heard "Daddy/Papaw/Uncle Seth traded a bottle of brandy for it to a corporal from Peoria?"
Family folktales are nice, but they are not history. Primary sources like diaries and and such, which are the words and memories of those who were there are history. Daddy/Papaw/Uncle Seth's pistol that he perhaps "got off a dead German officer" is just a curio.

JWF III
August 7, 2009, 07:41 PM
(In my best kid voice), "Daddy (or Grandaddy), what is this?" While the child points at some old relic.

You undermined your own point on this.

Please educate me on how I did this. My point is that if there is nothing there to capture tha kids interest on a subject, the question will not be asked. Thus the history will not be taught.

None of my milsurps have any personal history behind them. I know the story of how my father acquired a couple of them. But they are there to bring history to a more hands on state, for my kids.

I think we're best off not re-fighting our great-great-grandfathers' wars

Couldn't agree with you more. But the way our politicians listen to their "people", that may be the only thing that gets their attention. However, voting them out of office is the preferred method.

Wyman

Janos Dracwlya
August 7, 2009, 08:53 PM
A former acquaintance of mine, and one of the people who turned me on to collecting mil-surp rifles, told me this story.

Many years ago, he was at a gun show and he found a pretty nice looking Lee-Enfield. He picked it up to examine it. When he did so, he noticed that it had at least half a dozen stampings indicating that the rifle had been returned to an armoury for servicing. He explained that rifles would be serviced and get one of these stamps when they broke, when the soldier who carried them had been wounded or killed, or when they were found abandoned on the battlefield. There may be other cases, but that's what he told me. Anyway, he said that, realizing that this gun had possibly had seven owners who were wounded or killed, he couldn't put the thing down fast enough. He told me the story years after the fact and he still got the creeps just thinking about it.

Tirod
August 7, 2009, 09:20 PM
Weapons with a documented provenance will probably never get in my home because market demand will jack up the price too high for me to pay.

A gun used in a suicide? I wouldn't hunt them down, I would take them if offered to remove them from the suffering familiy.

Weapons produced before I could make a cognizant decision about whether slave labor was involved? Old pieces before say, 1971, probably. Current new in the box, what are we supporting? If anything, this discussion has prompted an awareness that I shouldn't buy any new Chinese AK.

On the other hand, I've trained, shot, carried, cleaned, inventoried, and finally. loathed the 1911. Like horses and 55 Chevies, they have become the most admired pet objects in the firearms industry. And like the hotrod industry selling small block chevy parts, the 1911 industry sells all sorts of mods, improvements, and gimmicks to improve the functioning, reliability, and accuracy of what is obviously Brownings's less than perfect design. If it was perfect, we wouldn't bother.

The Hipower is the true Gen 1 of all modern combat pistols - double action, double stacked. The 1911? It has a place as a historic relic, and that's the best can be said for it. Not being available from the DCM is probably the best thing that ever happened - they were sidelined because they were used up junk. The American government doesn't need the liability issues. It's successor - politically appointed as a trade for the use of Italian military bases, is nonetheless a superior duty firearm.

The Beretta 92 can directly trace it's mechanical history to the Walther P38 - a Nazi era weapon. The M60 feed mechanism can directly trace it's origins to the FG42, the Kevalr Helmet can directly trace it's origins to the Stahlhelm. Those mechanical origins have nothing to do with the philosophical mindset of the administration that invented it.

It's an American tradition to absorb the mechanical ingenuity of our defeated opponents. Might be one of the things that keeps us on top. Buying or not buying the relics of past conflict has nothing to do with the object itself, and everything to do with our emotional assessment of it.

If it bothers you, it bothers you. Later in life, it might not. I bought an LCP after Bill Ruger passed on. You can't hold a grudge too long, you might find yourself on the wrong side of it eventually.

oldfool
August 7, 2009, 09:26 PM
"So am I racist because I have a (original) Nazi Swastika Flag hanging in my gunroom"

Nope.
OP did not ask me what I think you would or would not do, asked "me" what I would do or would not do.
(me, American, mostly German folks being why I exist, so me racist maybe, I dunno)
I choose what flag I hang (inside or outside MY house), MY reasons. You choose what you do, your own reasons; so long as you don't hang it on my porch or try to put it on my living room wall. Mutual respect, until proven otherwise.

"What side my ancestors were on" pretty much depends on where/when.

(Not inclined to think you should ask my permission to do your thing, nor much inclined to think I should ask yours. For a non-political forum, which does it better than anyone else out there does it, sure are a lot of people trying to make it "political". (Guess I should have been astute enough to say I would never fly a flag celebrating the Brady Bunch, my fault)

"Did you live here during the fight for changing the state flag?"
Yup,
despicable act by scoundrels on the public payroll, classic misdirection play, divide and conquer, keep 'em looking at whatever flag flies over the building, instead of what happens under the roof. I preferred it stay the same (and me being an ex-Yankee, ~40 years ago) , but mostly didn't think it much mattered what was on the dome (Mickey Mouse flag or Skull & Crossbones), a tad more concerned about what they were going to do underneath it.

but I hope this thread don't get locked, because of me, cause it do sound pretty political

Oyeboten
August 7, 2009, 11:51 PM
Almost all the 'brains' of N.A.S.A. were ex-Nazi Scientists brought over in 'project paperclip'...


Guess a lot of THR members must have boycoted and snubbed the Space Program too.


Lol...



Dillinger-wise..."No"...not making 'excuses' for anyone...simply saying that calling him a 'famous murderer' is inocorrect, since he was not known to have been a murderer, and was never 'famous' for being a murderer.


Why should anyone care about facts?


Amatter of taste maybe...


But this thread really does show over-and-over, how fatuity of second hand emotion or being 'run' by introjected hear-say, propaganda and legend, is a very popular and high-powered stand-in and substitute for caring about Historical accuracy or facts, at all.


Sad...

gidaeon
August 8, 2009, 08:46 AM
long as its legal... No. Call me odd, but whether something was used for an awful tragedy or a heroic act, it helps me reflect a bit with solemn respect. Not that I own anything with real history.

If neither was the case I still respect as an inventive tool, a fun toy, ect., Even an inanimate object can be used to aid people in slowing down and remembering. When I go to a certain Air Force museum there are replica's of Little Boy bomb and massively destructive tools of war, why? because it helps see and understand. Its not just "what interesting\cool technology" its wow, such a device killed so many.. men, women, children.., *pause, silent respect* That's serious and hopefully part of the growing process into adulthood.

22-rimfire
August 8, 2009, 09:54 AM
There aren't any I wouldn't buy or own because of their history. But there are some I choose not to buy due to their quality. Some I wouldn't spend money for, but I probably wouldn't landfill it if someone gave me one.

DawgsFan_07
August 8, 2009, 12:11 PM
I'm not superstitious but having a murder gun would just be too creepy for me.

DawgsFan_07
August 8, 2009, 12:15 PM
BTW, I heard that the Israelis used quite a bit of German weapons and aircraft in their 1948 war with the arabs. Gotta love the irony.

Deltaboy
August 8, 2009, 01:06 PM
No because a gun is just another tool.

jimmyraythomason
August 8, 2009, 01:19 PM
A people defending themselves against one enemy with tools designed by another enemy to be used for their(and others) destruction IS irony in it's simplest form.

travellingJeff
August 8, 2009, 02:42 PM
I agree. If I had a collection of inexpensive, but accurate, Mosins and Mausers, I'd gladly lend them to unarmed friends "when the time was ripe" in America.

It's just a tool, folks. Merely a combination of specific atoms and molecules. It has no inherent evil.

Let me ask you this, lets say that those weapons were melted down, would you ask before you purchased any metal goods if that evil metal was included in them?

Dark Skies
August 8, 2009, 02:49 PM
CoRoMo said it "A stolen gun, or one used in a crime".

If the gun happened to have been owned by James, Dillinger, Barrow or similar even the "used in a crime" wouldn't bother me.

mustang_steve
August 8, 2009, 04:33 PM
The Jennings pistols and descendants....but that's more about quality than anything....I feel after making rather bad pistols for so long, the people behind the companies that keep popping up with those designs are destined to continue making bad pistols.

SeekHer
August 8, 2009, 05:08 PM
Having lost 80+ members of my family to the Nazis the rifle I used during the Yom Kippur War to shoot Arabs was a Schmidt scoped Mauser K98 with the Wehrmacht stamps on the metal work and over-stamped with the IDF logos...Now that's irony!

Would I buy German/Bavarian/Austrian guns for my own use...Merkel, Krieghoff, Blaser, Sauer, Steyr/Mannlicher, HK, Anschutz, Walther, Feinwerkbau, Mauser, Unique-Alpine --Hell, yes and I have them all, old and new civilian, mil-surp, don't matter...I won't buy a Benz, Porsch, BMW, Audi or Volkswagon but I'll buy their guns...

But I won't buy Colts (may they rot in Hell) because of what they did with the M16, Vietnam and Israel with the cast offs...They were directly responsible for killing or wounding friends and family not only in "The Nam" but in Israel...Luckily I don't have to as I can get a AR15/10 or a 1911A1 from lots of other makers, built far better and in many cases for a lot less money...I'm glad Colt (Rat bastards) lost the military contract for the M4, maybe now they die and I can go and piss on their grave site like I'm going to do to that lying POS Robert S. McNamara's!

I won't buy Ford's because of Henry One's racist, bigoted stance that he'd hire a ****** before he'd ever hire a kyke and his involvement with the publication of the extremely anti Semitic pamphlet "The Elders of Zion" which was a basis for Hitler's "Mien Kampf" nor would I shod any vehicle with his brother-in-laws tires, Firestone...

gdcpony
August 8, 2009, 06:21 PM
10/22's
Never liked them- always were shoddy to me, but my parents did.
My mom used one I bought for her on herself. She died for her mistake in assuming a stomach wound with a .22 is always survivable. Not the weapon's fault. No logic, just can't look at them as just a POS rifle anymore. Sorry.

Officers'Wife
August 8, 2009, 07:39 PM
Before this thread is locked, let me thank those of you that have given me insights on your opinions that differ than mine. Especially NWilliams and Paintballdude. I hope the time comes I can gather more information on the limits of your opinions.

Selena

Officers'Wife
August 8, 2009, 07:49 PM
Hi SeekHer,

For my curiosity, have the present board of directors of Ford Motor published or espoused anti-Semitic literature or organizations? Considering Henry Ford is dead, it seems a bit extreme to boycott the products just because he founded the corporation.

What is your opinion of Fritz Haber who's research in WWI poison gases led to the development of the gas used by the Nazi death camps later?

Item last: During WWII a handgun called the Liberator was distributed behind enemy lines. This was a single shot weapon of dubious quality and manufactured just plain cheap. Should the manufacturer of that weapon be boycotted as well?



FWIW, I agree with you about Colt Industries but for different reasons.

Selena

SeanSw
August 9, 2009, 12:41 AM
Would you buy Lizzy Borden's axe?

Would you buy Lizzy Borden's axe if the head had been replaced twice and the handle three times? At what point does an object lose it's significance?

The hardest fight for gun rights is separating emotions from the truth. I believe that giving negative value to a firearm due to it's is sentimental nature is doing disservice to the cause by playing into the fears of the same people that would invalidate your rights because of their own personal sentiments.

There is no soul of the gun. Some may be artifacts, mindful artifacts, but owning them is not an endorsement. They are history. And history is a grand lesson for all of us.

Joe Demko
August 9, 2009, 12:53 AM
What lesson does Lizzy Borden's axe have for us? How about Jeff Dahmer's drill or butcher knife? I'm getting two messages here that I don't think support each other.
1. They are just objects, so David Berkowitz's Charter Arms .44 is just a Charter Arms .44 no different from any other.
2. They are history and have big, important lessons to teach us, so we must preserve them lest history be forgot.
It can't be both ways.

berrieberrie
August 9, 2009, 07:38 AM
That being said, I do stigmatize the Axis weapons, and I wouldn't buy any of those. (Germany and Japan I guess, Italy doesn't count for me). I know its not rational at all, but thats how I feel about it.
To each his own but indeed not rational at all, since Italy made up 1/3 of the main Axis powers, no matter how you look at it. Care to share what makes you feel this way ?

Wolfebyte
August 9, 2009, 08:47 AM
Is there a gun you WON'T buy becasue of its history?

Only if ammo is no longer made for it..

SeanSw
August 9, 2009, 11:40 AM
Sorry, there were a few hours between beginning my response and hitting post before going to bed. The point I wanted to make was that we are responsible for whatever sentiments remain attached to a firearm. It's up to us to decide if they should be revered or reviled, and whether that value has diminished over time through use or change of hands. The negative associations can end with you, so to speak, if you choose not to retell the story. After they are passed on they fall into the rest of histories unknown for future generations to question.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is there a gun you WON'T buy becasue of its history?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!