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

[bigalexe]

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.

 

[CoRoMo]

A stolen gun, or one used in a crime.

What's the ill stigma about a Nazi rifle?

 

[highorder]

I dont attach emotional hang-ups to material objects.

 

[Carl]

I'd only decline to buy a historical gun if the person raised the price significantly on it because of the history.

 

[bigalexe]

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]

...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]

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

Unless the owner is a skinhead or Neo-Nazi.

 

[mcdonl]

I would hope they are not on the high road.

 

[bigalexe]

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]

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]

Then again, it may be haunted.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

CoRoMo said it "A stolen gun, or one used in a crime". That about sizes it up for me too.

 

[DHJenkins]

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]

I would even buy a stolen gun or one used in a crime. In fact, I have. From a DNR/police auction.

 

[Officers'Wife]

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]

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]

Post #14 takes the cake. That is as good a post as I've ever read.

Thank you!

 

[Tim the student]

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]

(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]

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]

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]

NOPE.

 

[PT1911]

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]

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]

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.