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

[Owen Sparks]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Guns I Wouldn't Carry?

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]

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]

Or the rifles issued to the National Guardsmen at Kent State back in ancient times?

HEY!!! Ancient times my Aunt Fanny! I was a senior in high school in 1970!

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Define "stolen". GI bringbacks are "stolen", war booty is "stolen".

 

[jimmyraythomason]

"To the victor go the spoils"

 

[MrFox]

So you are telling me you wouldn't want a cannon from Blackbeard's ship? COME ONNN!!! I'd be all over that.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

I think they recently found Blackbeard's flagship. All of his cannon are accounted for.

 

[KBintheSLC]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.