Ethic implications with milsurps?

[snake284]

mgregg, I'm glad you feel that way. But it's very easy to sit here in the comfort of your computer room and say that. It's altogether a different matter when you're under the gun. I still don't blame soldiers because they are taught to do or die, not to reason why.

 

[Ohio Gun Guy]

I dont disagree... Although I do see both sides of it. As history owning one is not necessarily condoning what happened. It may actually serve as a way to discuss history and tell people what happened. (In my experience, a lot of people know very little of even "Modern History"). On the otherhand, I can actually say that I was at a table full of RC capture mausers, one was a BNZ and it was not marked higher.....figured I could make a few dollars on it if I wanted to......decided I didnt want it due to the HIGH probabality that it was forced laborers who made it. Just wasnt for me.

 

[Joe Demko]

We do not "own history." We own artifacts. Said artifacts have little to tell us beyond their year and place of manufacture. A Mosin-Nagant in your safe tells us nothing of Tsarist or Bolshevik oppression. It's just a gun you bought for cheap.

 

[CowboyTim]

At the risk of being drawn and quartered by the puritans, you could always have a nice sporter built on that Mauser action...cleanse the evil, so to speak...

 

[neededausername]

Yes I own an artifact that was manufactured in 1943 in the capital city of the Udmurt republic, it is the most prolific rifle ever produced and nothing special to a collector, just a gun I bought for cheap. It has almost certainly seen battle as it was manufactured by people who were so desperate to defend their homeland they couldn't produce enough rifles to arm their soldiers and sent them into battle without arms. It has probably killed people who I would agree with being killed and innocents who I would be horrified if I knew the stories. Does the rifle itself tell me anything about the Tsars or Bolsheviks? No, but after owning it and doing research about it and the markings on it, I've learned a lot about the Tsars and Bolsheviks. So maybe it is just an out of place artifact, but it has been a doorway to me.

 

[country boy marksman]

I just read the original question and a few answers to my dad, and he had a good comparison to make:

If you owned the pen that Hitler used to write Mein Kampf, or the pen Carl Marx used to write Communist Manifesto, would these pens be evil? And on the other hand, would the pen that Thomas Jefferson used to write the Declaration of Independence be more good, or one the pens Paul used to write half of the New Testament be more holy? (unfortunately, this would be done by those who place their faith in God upon supposed "holy" relics) The answer is NO. They are just inanimate objects. Evil resides in the spirit, not in the tools used by said evil people.

This is just what my dad and I had to say about it. Sorry for the religious views, moderators, I understand if you need to edit this, it was meant merely as an example.

 

[BrocLuno]

I think some are missing one point, it's not the object itself - it's how it feels in hand - to the holder. This is an emotional response to a thing. Yeah sure, it's a thing - but it is causing a reaction. If the reaction and associated thoughts are making someone sad or unsure, that someone needs to do what they need to do. The thing may be fine in another persons hand - it ain't the thing, it's the person. But things do have power - how about US Flag? Or, cross burning in the night? Would anyone here see the ovens at Auschwitz and say "Oh, nice oven - what you going to bake?" One look and you feel bad/sad or worse. That thing has power over emotion - maybe this rifle does too?

 

[foghornl]

I have a few "Mil-Surps" and I regard them as "Artifacts of History".

But I would LOVE to hear their stories...

Romanian M-44 Mosin Nagant
US Rifle Cal .30 M1
Yugo SKS

 

[merlinfire]

In the future I'll probably buy Polish or pre-Nazi Mausers instead. Does it trouble anyone else knowing that some of the weapons you hold were used to kill people, potentially to murder civilians?

I can definitely understand your thoughts. I know people who feel the same way, and one would never own anything that he knows was used by the Third Reich.

I say that if you don't feel comfortable with it, I wouldn't keep it. Life's too short to have a gun you don't like.

However, you could look at this from different perspectives. One is that by putting the gun to use in the hands of a free-man, who is a descendant of the men and women that put an end to the Nazi regime, is the greatest revenge and "redeems" the weapon you hold. Instead of being used to subjugate others, it becomes a tool in the hands of a citizen to protect liberty.

 

[merlinfire]

Would anyone here see the ovens at Auschwitz and say "Oh, nice oven - what you going to bake?"

Wow, good point.

 

[Phaethon]

Hate to point out a minor issue: Vz's are Czech not Romanian.

After the German occupation of the Sudetenland in 1938, they began to gear the Czech factories to produce VZ-24's for the Romanian's, whom were showing eagerness to cooperate with Nazi Germany. Hence, Romanian contract.

I appreciate a lot of the responses on here (not really the ones that are nicely trying to tell me that I'm an idiot) but it is true that these instruments are just pieces of metal and wood. I'm keeping the rifle, but I was just voicing a sentiment that I felt when I first spent time thinking about it. Looking at an old military surplus rifle, I always regard it as my rifle, "my tool". As a result it's almost strange to me to think that somewhere, almost a hundred years ago, this same rifle was someone else's tool. I wonder about the history and usage of them; the things that - could rifles talk - they've seen, the horrible stories they could tell. Sometimes when I lay my rifle next to my bed at night, I imagine that somewhere long ago, in some cold black winter of the Eastern Front, my rifle might have been a man's only friend.

Basically what I mean to say is that realizing the possibilities of the long history of any rifle is very sobering, as many of them have traveled thousands of miles and many decades to our living rooms now. I'm pretty new to Milsurps.

However, back to the point of topic; I understand the idea that a gun with dark history would want to be kept to serve as a 'living reminder of a dark era', but at the same time I wonder if having such weapons doesn't in a way trivialize that history at the same time. It relies entirely upon on the owner to do the history justice; otherwise to anyone else it's just a nice old rifle from long ago. Besides, it seems too likely that anyone could just pick up a Karabiner with SS runes and think it's "cool", while showing it off to all of his (presumably ignorant) friends; nevermind the aforementioned Neo-Nazi's working the merchandise. They have a right to though, I was just posing a question to see how others felt on the subject.

But anyway, my VZ is a good rifle. Would I ever buy a rifle stamped for Einsatzgruppen or Concentration Camp guards? Never.

 

[M.C.]

I hope everyone with a Mosin Nagant can sleep well at night knowing that the Soviets murdered more people than the Nazis could ever dream of killing.

Anyone ever heard of the Holomodor? 11 million Ukrainian civilians who were purposely murdered through starvation by the Soviets.

How many millions of innocents were murdered in the Soviet Gulags? many more than ever died in Nazi concentration camps. Think of all the poor people murdered and raped when the Red Army took over their country.

The Allied startegy of carpet bombing German civilian centers was pretty awful also, are you still comfortable using that old Garand?

I dont really care what a rifle was used for in the past, whether you think it was used for good or for evil, the truth is not so black vs. white.

I would love to have an old Rhodesian FAL that was used to kill Communist terrorists, the more bodies on it the better

I agree... a gun is nothing more than a tool or instrument... useless without human hands. Whether it was used to kill a million civilians or two nazi, soviets, US, Japanese, etc... is immaterial...

What's the saying? If guns kill people, pencils misspell words.

 

[BrocLuno]

Yup, they sure do - and so do keyboards. I'm still trying to beat mine into submission but it keeps arguing with me

 

[Cosmoline]

Of course, statistically there's probably a good chance that your rifle was kept in storage and never used.

This is really an important consideration. I always see ads saying that such-and-such Mosin was "used at Stalingrad." Most never saw that kind of action, and many were never fired in anger at all.

I'm not too troubled by the past associations with baddies, but I must admit I have a fondness for the weapons of the nations I'm sympathetic with. Finns, for example. They ended up on the wrong side, but they had little choice in the matter. Their wars were the forerunner of the Cold War more than part of WWII.

 

[JerryM]

Is it guns that are responsible for killing people?

Regards,
Jerry

 

[KodiakBeer]

Yes I own an artifact that was manufactured in 1943 in the capital city of the Udmuk republic

That would be the Udmurt republic.

As far as any of these NAZI or Soviet weapons go, just the fact that we can buy them indicates that we prevailed over the systems that produced them. We won. Their weapons are now toys for the victors.

 

[QUICK_DRAW_McGRAW]

its just a tool used, it didn't aim itself and fire the round but rather the person holding it.

 

[suzukisam]

if the potential that evil was done with any object lures a person to it, than I believe the evil is in their heart, not the object. The fact that your concerned tells me you don't have evil in your heart and the item cannot put it there! it would be wrong to relish an item for it's evil history if you even knew it had one, since you are not, you are good to go. And has been pointed out your gun may have never been used for any of that anyway

 

[Art Eatman]

A gun doesn't care who made it or who shoots it. It's an inanimate object. Morality has to do with people, not things.

At least, that's what we've been telling the gun-grabbers for many and many a decade.

A dollar doesn't care if it's used by a priest to help a poor person or by a narcotrafficante to hire a contract killer.

 

[mljdeckard]

Look at it this way. They lost. We are now able to look at pieces associated with the event in the light that they tried and failed.

 

[country boy marksman]

I think some are missing one point, it's not the object itself - it's how it feels in hand - to the holder. This is an emotional response to a thing. Yeah sure, it's a thing - but it is causing a reaction. If the reaction and associated thoughts are making someone sad or unsure, that someone needs to do what they need to do. The thing may be fine in another persons hand - it ain't the thing, it's the person. But things do have power - how about US Flag? Or, cross burning in the night? Would anyone here see the ovens at Auschwitz and say "Oh, nice oven - what you going to bake?" One look and you feel bad/sad or worse. That thing has power over emotion - maybe this rifle does too?

This is a very good point, thank you. This hadn't occurred to me. I would still buy the mauser, or whatever other gun could be in question, but yes, I will now see a gun differently, to an extent, if I know for a fact that it was used to do some sort of "evil deed".

 

[sixgunner455]

I have had three milsurp rifles, and one pistol.

My first rifle was an M44 Romanian Mosin-Nagant rifle, dated 1954 on the receiver. I never thought about how it might have been used. My second was a Yugo SKS, a 59/66. It had been fired quite a bit, but did not look to have been used in the field much. My third is a K31. The tag under the buttplate says it belonged to an artillery crewman, and the red tape bands say that it was used in marksmanship competitions. And it is the nicest of the three by a large margin of workmanship, its accuracy has to be seen to be believed. Of the three, it is the one that is least likely to have been used in a fight anywhere, even though it is the oldest by two decades. I also like to think that it and the guns like it helped keep Switzerland out of WWII.

I also have an old British service revolver I bought in Afghanistan. It dates to about 1870. I rather imagine that it was taken off a British officer and used by an Afghan warrior and his descendants until they couldn't get ammunition for it anymore. The cylinder stop bolt is worn down to the point that the cylinder spins freely. I bought an old Khyber fighting knife from the same era that had seen some rough use, too.

I like milsurps for the history. I like the Afghanistan stuff because I think about how those tough old tribesmen just defended their land to the best of their ability. Heck, maybe they slaughtered goats with that revolver! But the others? I like them for what they represent. I guess it doesn't matter a lot to me if any of them were used in a fight. They do two things for me - they represent the history of the time period they come from, including the fighting some weapons of those models may have participated in, and they are cool old guns. Especially the K31, it is cool to shoot.

I've got a 1930 police service .38 revolver, too. I don't particularly worry about what it may have been used for, either. It just doesn't matter.

 

[General Geoff]

This is an excellent thread, just wanted to say that.

Many folks bring up the point that while inanimate objects may have no will of their own, they can carry deep emotional baggage with them to whomever recognizes the tool for that which it was used in the past. The ovens at Auschwitz are one example; the Enola Gay is another. Yes, they're mindless objects. That doesn't mean their history won't affect the way people view these tools, for better or worse. So, in the end, owning or using a milsurp firearm is really a matter of personal taste and perception. I will say this; a weapon's storied past need not prevent it from leading a storied future.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Sory I have heard about the nazi Mausers used by Israelis: the Czechs who made the guns told the Israelis that when they made Mausers for the nazis they would offset the front sights by about a meter off at 100m before they left the factory, so they advised the Israelis to check the zero before using them. It may just be scuttlebutt, but it was interesting.

 

[Col. Plink]

I have a Czech Nazi "contract" vz-24, it ain't botched. Thought about what it might have done in the hands of a Romanian; have also fired a Nazi p38 that sure looked evil...

I figure a day of can plinkin' takes off any bad juju...