Should Soldiers Today Be Able to Bring Back Weapons?
- Thread starter SharpsDressedMan
- Start date
- Status
SabbathWolf
member
Well thank you sincerely for your unsolicited advice.
My reading skills are just fine thanks.....lol
Point of fact is that I have no problems with civilians owning the same types of firearms as everybody else.
I'm Pro 2A and think many/all of our current gun laws should be repealed.
"This" however, still has nothing to do with soldiers "earning" the right to bring back weapons acquired through blood, sweat and tears in combat that civilians don't earn.
The discussion is based on what the OP originally wrote.
Not what "you" say it is.
amd6547
Member
I did not give blood, sweat and tears for my war trophy pistol...my father did.
He served in an armored cavalry unit in Europe in WWII, and brought home a Norwegian 1911.
After he passed away, it was decided by my family that my brother and I would divide my dads firearms.
I got the 1911, and my brother got a French 32, (german marked and also brought home), and a 9mm Radom he acquired circa 1970.
My fathers bring back 1911 is probably my most prized possession.
It is sad that future generations won't have these trophies to remind them of the sacrifices made on their behalf.
To say that most weapons of our adversaries are full auto is so wrong.
Today's soldiers have collected tons of bolt action rifles, commercial shotguns, and handguns...weapons that any one of us could buy without restriction...why can't they be brought home?
He served in an armored cavalry unit in Europe in WWII, and brought home a Norwegian 1911.
After he passed away, it was decided by my family that my brother and I would divide my dads firearms.
I got the 1911, and my brother got a French 32, (german marked and also brought home), and a 9mm Radom he acquired circa 1970.
My fathers bring back 1911 is probably my most prized possession.
It is sad that future generations won't have these trophies to remind them of the sacrifices made on their behalf.
To say that most weapons of our adversaries are full auto is so wrong.
Today's soldiers have collected tons of bolt action rifles, commercial shotguns, and handguns...weapons that any one of us could buy without restriction...why can't they be brought home?
I think it boils down to three questions...
First, will it interfere with good order and discipline?
Second, will it be an administrative headache?
Third, will it interfere with our responsibilities to not take cultural artifacts of historical significance.
I know that my grandfather participated in the occupation of Japan and brought back a number of Japanese items that were brought on the open market. Would he have been able to purchase them in an arms length transaction had the Japanese economy not been destroyed along with their military?
First, will it interfere with good order and discipline?
Second, will it be an administrative headache?
Third, will it interfere with our responsibilities to not take cultural artifacts of historical significance.
I know that my grandfather participated in the occupation of Japan and brought back a number of Japanese items that were brought on the open market. Would he have been able to purchase them in an arms length transaction had the Japanese economy not been destroyed along with their military?
bluethunder1962
Member
H-- yes
HankB
Member
My Dad brought home a number of weapons - edged and otherwise - from WWII. (I inherited an Arisaka and some very nice samurai cutlery.) At that time, he did have to have a pass signed by the CO that the weapons were war trophies from the field of battle - he had a whole stack of these passes.
Quite a bit was stolen on the troop ship home (he was no longer just with his outfit) and he sold still more to green troops - going price for a Nambu with holster and a box of ammo was $75, not bad for 1945.
As for now . . . there's a basic hoplophobic mentality in the military today, starting with the Commander In Chief and extending through the general officer ranks. Hell, these are the people who saw to it that Major Nidal had a large group of completely unarmed soldiers to kill, who send men out on guard duty with no ammo - sometimes no guns! - to safeguard military installations, the same people who even in some cases want guns stored off base to be registered. Why do you think they'd want to let guys bring ANYTHING home?
Quite a bit was stolen on the troop ship home (he was no longer just with his outfit) and he sold still more to green troops - going price for a Nambu with holster and a box of ammo was $75, not bad for 1945.
As for now . . . there's a basic hoplophobic mentality in the military today, starting with the Commander In Chief and extending through the general officer ranks. Hell, these are the people who saw to it that Major Nidal had a large group of completely unarmed soldiers to kill, who send men out on guard duty with no ammo - sometimes no guns! - to safeguard military installations, the same people who even in some cases want guns stored off base to be registered. Why do you think they'd want to let guys bring ANYTHING home?
DammitBoy
Member
It most certainly does. A main central factor of bring back weapons being forbidden is that they are full auto weapons (for the most part). Soldiers returning to civilian life would be forbidden by our current laws to keep them.
This is directly related to the fact that our 2nd amendment rights are infringed upon by unconstitutional laws.
Furthermore, every citizen of this country has a right to bear arms - it isn't earned or given by the government or military service.
There is only one type of citizen in the United States -- one who is entitled to all the rights and privileges enshrined in the Constitution.
Military veterans are not "super citizens" who are entitled to more or different rights than every other American.
The military is an all-volunteer service. Although military members certainly endure hardships and sacrifices that many Americans never have to, they did so completely voluntarily and knowing full well that it did not entitle them to any special privileges.
I'm proud to be a military member and a combat veteran, but in no way does that make me any more special than any other free man who lives in America.
Military veterans are not "super citizens" who are entitled to more or different rights than every other American.
The military is an all-volunteer service. Although military members certainly endure hardships and sacrifices that many Americans never have to, they did so completely voluntarily and knowing full well that it did not entitle them to any special privileges.
I'm proud to be a military member and a combat veteran, but in no way does that make me any more special than any other free man who lives in America.
mortablunt
Member
Yes, they should be allowed to do it. They put their lives on the line in check written to the government. They ought to be able to keep any accrued interest.
SharpsDressedMan
member
I'm still trying to figure out how all these high dollar Washington security firms (owned and run by ex-Secret Service and FBI guys) have late issue MP5's (post 1968, which means they were supposed to be dealer samples or for the military or police only), etc, for their security details. I'm thinking that having been connected in DC to all these cool agencies, they have somehow gotten exemptions to have them so that they can protect dignitaries and other political allies and assets to the US government. Does anyone have a fix on this? Blackwater is an example, but there are many more discreet ones. Meanwhile, us normal folks have to pay $14K and up for converted and otherwise "tranferable" machineguns, etc.
blarby
Member
Yes.
Bring the guns home.
Bring the guns home.
mljdeckard
Member
I am a veteran of BOTH gulf wars. I don't think in any way, shape, or form, that this gives me any preference points over any citizen for any right.
ConstitutionCowboy
member
There is a simple solution to all of this: Repeal the NFA, the GCA of '68, and all the rest of those infringing feral(federal) 'gun control' laws, and then enforce the Second Amendment on the several states.
Problem solved.
Otherwise, anyone is able to join the military, go to war, and bring home a trophy. Just because you might be in a position to bring one home doesn't mean you have any special preference. You just made the appropriate choices in life to reap that reward. It's no different than the differences between what is earned by different folks based upon education, chosen fields of endeavor, work ethic, etc., etc., etc.
Woody
mljdeckard
Member
That's a couple of BIG ifs down the road.
paintballdude902
Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2007
- Messages
- 2,872
i have an email from the ATF telling me i am allowed to send home an antique firearm...... with CO permission
sixgunner455
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 3,052
In my unit, just about everyone brought home several antiques. We had paperwork to fill out to authorize it, and a JAG officer detailed to check them all.
We bought them all, cash money, no stealing, no "trophy" taking. I was more interested in the cool old stuff than in anything that would have gotten me in trouble, had I been caught with it.
We bought them all, cash money, no stealing, no "trophy" taking. I was more interested in the cool old stuff than in anything that would have gotten me in trouble, had I been caught with it.
This has been a very good discussion that has giving me a break from work multiple times, I don't have an over all opinion on this, there have been many good points on both sides, either way, all i want to say is thanks to all those who have served and thanks to all who have posted, it's been a very interesting read!
shuvelrider
Member
Same here, Lot of good points pro and con, logical and asinine. But what I see, is way too many variables to ever reach a satisfactory compromise/agreement, on the issue from the OP.
As a soldier, yes I would like to bring something home. Will it ever be allowed again?, not anytime soon.
Anti gun sentiment and "some" dummies in the military who should not be around any firearms?, you bet-----plenty of them."Highly trained" is a glazed over word that sounds good, reality will show you otherwise.
As a soldier, yes I would like to bring something home. Will it ever be allowed again?, not anytime soon.
Anti gun sentiment and "some" dummies in the military who should not be around any firearms?, you bet-----plenty of them."Highly trained" is a glazed over word that sounds good, reality will show you otherwise.
mljdeckard
Member
On the other hand, I do have a good friend who brought home three 1855 Enfield muzzle-loaders in different lengths. He had to repeatedly explain to officials that according to BATFE, they are NOT firearms.
beatledog7
Member
Waited a while to post.
I agree with post 17. Tell soldiers they can keep what they capture, and for a handful of them, finding an enemy combatant who's carrying the desired item--then finding a way to justify engaging him--quickly supersedes the real mission. Commanders can't afford that sort of disturbance in the force, in you catch my meaning.
It comes to this: When a soldier writes something as part of his job, that writing is not his. He cannot copyright it, nor can he profit from it. His effort produced it; his understanding of the topic made it possible. But he did it for Uncle Sam, in Uncle Sam's employ. Uncle Sam owns it.
If a soldier manages to disarm an enemy--capture his firearm--he has done so because that's his job. His claim on that captured weapon is the same as the other soldier's claim on that piece of writing: Zero.
As for U.S. firearms that are leaving the inventory, all citizens should have an equal claim on them through legitimate sales (albeit in a somewhat demilitarized state). I see no reason for veterans to have dibs.
Yes, I am a veteran. No, I don't posses any of the firearms or other durable equipment that were issued to me over 27 years of service. They were mine to care for and use, not to own.
I agree with post 17. Tell soldiers they can keep what they capture, and for a handful of them, finding an enemy combatant who's carrying the desired item--then finding a way to justify engaging him--quickly supersedes the real mission. Commanders can't afford that sort of disturbance in the force, in you catch my meaning.
It comes to this: When a soldier writes something as part of his job, that writing is not his. He cannot copyright it, nor can he profit from it. His effort produced it; his understanding of the topic made it possible. But he did it for Uncle Sam, in Uncle Sam's employ. Uncle Sam owns it.
If a soldier manages to disarm an enemy--capture his firearm--he has done so because that's his job. His claim on that captured weapon is the same as the other soldier's claim on that piece of writing: Zero.
As for U.S. firearms that are leaving the inventory, all citizens should have an equal claim on them through legitimate sales (albeit in a somewhat demilitarized state). I see no reason for veterans to have dibs.
Yes, I am a veteran. No, I don't posses any of the firearms or other durable equipment that were issued to me over 27 years of service. They were mine to care for and use, not to own.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Interesting, another wrinkle:
The previous two questions were:
1) Should soldiers be allowed to take home personal trophies from the dead/defeated enemy?
2) Should soldiers be granted personal freedoms, when they return to civilian life, which exceed those of other civilian citizens?
To those we can add:
3) Should soldiers be allowed to purchase items (including antique firearms, or modern firearms of our "Title I" sort) on the (presumably) free market within the country they occupy, for import back to the States?
That removes both the stumbling blocks of NFA Title II items and the unseemly question of "trophy hunting." It appears the answer to this question is largely (or at least, often) yes, in today's Army.
The previous two questions were:
1) Should soldiers be allowed to take home personal trophies from the dead/defeated enemy?
2) Should soldiers be granted personal freedoms, when they return to civilian life, which exceed those of other civilian citizens?
To those we can add:
3) Should soldiers be allowed to purchase items (including antique firearms, or modern firearms of our "Title I" sort) on the (presumably) free market within the country they occupy, for import back to the States?
That removes both the stumbling blocks of NFA Title II items and the unseemly question of "trophy hunting." It appears the answer to this question is largely (or at least, often) yes, in today's Army.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
As a side note, I recently read William Manchester's Goodbye Darkness and he recounted some very ugly incidents of the fairly common tendency of soldiers to become preoccupied with securing souvenirs from the battlefield, and/or the dead. These often resulted in men out of position, not performing their assigned duties, and all too often, seriously wounded or dead scavenging prized trophies.
- Status