Sierra Times: We Want Our Rifles Back!

[shooterx10]

We Want Our Rifles Back!
By Jennifer Freeman

The United States government is denying the request of law-abiding citizens to buy back military surplus M14s citing international agreements that would make such a program, "problematic."

We can only presume that the referred agreement was made during the United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade of Small Arms and Light Weapons in All its Aspects in July 2001. As referenced in a follow up article on NewsMax, "Members also agreed to place special emphasis on post-conflict situations, to destroy illicit or surplus weapons as necessary, and to act responsibly in export, import, transit and retransfer of weapons." Also suggested at the conference was, "'voluntary' collection of small arms and the confiscation of "illegal" weapons."

Needless to say, this type of agreement with the United Nations or other foreign entity poses a serious threat to the citizens and the sovereignty of the United States of America. As citizens we have the God-given right to keep and bear arms to defend ourselves and to preserve this nation in the event of a foreign governmental installation (i.e., tyranny). These rights are documented and recognized in our Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

It was the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens of the United States of America that purchased these firearms for our military's use. And the law-abiding, taxpaying citizens should have the option of buying these firearms back from the government. The government being by the people, of the people, and for the people. It is not up to the United Nations to determine whether or not American citizens should have the option of retaining what is rightfully ours.

We must also presume that attempts to ban semi-automatic rifles, incorrectly dubbed "assault weapons" is a further attempt of certain politicians to make progress in achieving the U.N.'s goal of total disarmament.

Clearly politicians who introduce and support U.N. disarmament programs do not recognize the people of the United States as citizens whose God-given rights are acknowledged by the U.S. Constitution - the law of the land. Rather, they view us as subjects who have no rights and whose opinions are of no consequence. This is evidenced in the continual introduction of gun-ban legislation year after year with no regard whatsoever for the safety and sovereignty of the American people.

It is time, therefore, for gun owners to inform President Bush of our position on this and related issues. We encourage you to write to President Bush and advise him of the following:

# United States citizens do not report to the United Nations and we do not recognize any agreements that would supercede our Constitutional Rights. Considering that the United Nations is devoted to total disarmament, we recommend that the United States terminate its participation in the United Nations. As such we support the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003 - H.R. 1146.

# The term "assault weapon" is erroneous in its reference to semi-automatic rifles - Rifles of the type that have been commercially available since 1896. These rifles fire one round for every single pull of the trigger. As such we support the Sunset of the "Assault Weapons" ban. And, we oppose any additional or continuing restrictions on semi-automatic rifles including S. 1034, H.R. 143, and H.R. 2038.

# We support a civilian buy back program that would allow law-abiding citizens to purchase military surplus firearms, including the M14, despite what dismay this may cause the United Nations.

Remember to send your letter to:

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
202-456-1111 or 202-456-1414
Fax: 202-456-2461

80 million angry gun owners is more problematic than breaking an anti-Constitutional agreement with the U.N.

Here is the link.

 

[Augustwest]

Would that most of those 80 million gun-owners were less apathetic...

 

[Mark Tyson]

Yeah, a disturbing percentage of those 80 million gun owners will sell the rest of out because we don't "need" military style weapons. Someone should ask them if they truly "need" to hunt or shoot clay pigeons.

Retch.

 

[2dogs]

they view us as subjects

And that pretty well sums it up.

 

[Old Fuff]

I think that part of the problem with original, military M-14's is that they have the capability of being altered to full-automatic by simply adding a few parts. Consequently the old BATF (now ATF&E) took the position that "once an automatic, always an automatic" and therefore they couldn't be re-imported. I believe in some cases such rifles were stripped, and the parts, less the frame were imported and assembled on new receivers that weren't milled to take the full-auto parts. I would ask, "if this was done in the past, why can't it be done now?"

And yes, if importation is being stopped because of some agreement with the United Nations - or anyone else - I would like to see some specifics. While writing Mr. Bush, ask some questions.

 

[alan]

Old Fluff and shooter10x:

Re the piece you posted, shooter 10x, while there is some question as to the availablity, not to mention the allegedly sad condition of any "surplus M-14 rifles, the fact??? that members of the genre are being sold or provided to domestic LE, raises questions as to the above, might these "international agreements" in ENGLISH, be spelled UN BULL??????, or simply BULL??????

Old Fluff: Re automatic fire capability of the M-14 rifle, the original examples did have this capability. It was found, by the military, that in full automatic mode of fire, the damned things were virtually uncontrollable. Seems that their approximately 10# weight, BAR's weighed about 20# loaded, wasn't enough, though some people complained that they were to heavy to carry, they weighed about the same as the M-1 Rifle did.

Anyhow, I believe that it was The Ordinance Dept. that came up with the proceedure eventually utilized to not only REMOVE full automatric fire capability, but to render it very difficult to restore. Not only was the substitution of parts involved, but if memory serves, 7 individual welds were specified. Seems as if a whole lot more than the simple "replacement of a few parts" would be involved in automatic fire capability restoration. Of course, there is then the following question. Are the necessary parts availble??

 

[Sergeant Bob]

IIRC, didn't Clinton send most of the surplus M-14's overseas, then they were banned for import even if demilled? Will have to look for some linky's. Does anyone else remember this?

 

[Sergeant Bob]

Estonia 9 Jan 40,500 M14 rifles; 1,328,300 7.62mm ball ammo; 1,000,000 7.62mm blank ammo; 81,219 7.62mm tracer ammo
380,000 5.56mm tracer ammo; EDA Army free

Lithuania 9 Jan 40,000 M14 rifles; 500,000 7.62mm blank ammunition; 1,500,000 7.62mm ball ammunition- EDA Army free

Arms Sales Monitor No. 37 (10 April 1998)

At that time the deals were pending and could be disapproved by congress. I don't think they were disapproved.

 

[Standing Wolf]

It's time and long past time to deport the United Nations to Zimbabwe.

 

[Moparmike]

Yup. Its time to kick the United Nutcases out of the United States. Has been for some time now.

I dont know which to kick out first. California, or the United Nutcases . Anyone know where to start?

 

[Old Fuff]

Alan:

You are right about the technical points concerning full-automatic fire and the M-14 rifle. The problem is that once the BATF had made a ruling they wouldn't change it. Their position across-the-board was, and I think still is, "Once a machine gun always a machine gun." Modifications to the receiver satisfied the Army, but not the BATF.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Hurrah for Jennifer Freeman & the Sierra Times!

 

[alan]

Old Fluff:

Typical of the bureaucracy, isn't it? Don't bother us with such mundane considerations as with the world isn't flat, and 2 + 2 = 4. Look what happened to Galileo. All he did was to look through a crude telescope, and publically state what he had, in fact, seen.

While the BATF, with or without the E didn't then exist, the Inquisition did. Some might be goven to wonder as to which was worse.

 

[Moparmike]

Sorry, but it has to be done...

*Dramatic Music* Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!! Our chief weapon is surprise, surprise and fear...




At least you could shoot the inquisitors. The Bureau of Anally-retentive Terroristic Freedom Encroachers comes heavily armed. Usually in Condition 0 with hair triggers.

 

[CasualShooter]

Standing Wolf,

It's time and long past time to deport the United Nations to Zimbabwe.

That's a Great Idea! I'll second your motion.

 

[jimpeel]

Moparmike

Sound file

 

[Old Fuff]

Alan:

One has to understand the mindset of that agency (if they have such a thing). The 1968 G.C.A. focused a lot on "good guns," which were those obviously met for "sporting purposes," with sporting purposes to be defined as narrowly as possible. Guns with a military background were "evil guns," and should be discouraged and kept out of the country as much as possible.

Some years ago Interarms found itself with several hundred war-surplus 1911-A1 pistols that were in a warehouse in England. They were in fact brand new. They tried to re-import them back into the United States but the BATF said "no" even though a few hundred, more or less, .45's wouldn't have mattered given the number already in circulation.

So Interarms stripped the guns, brought in the parts less frames, assembled the parts on new commercial frames, and marketed them under the name "Silver Cup."

Rules you know ......

 

[Cosmoline]

To my knowledge, the US was not a signatory to any agreement out of the 2001 conference. Nothing was ratified by the Senate from that conference. There was a feel-good statement produced by the conference, but no treaty that we were part of.

I suspect the culprit is our own idiotic laws and regulations. Which is another reason I'd like to send the agency formerly known as the BATF over to the nation formerly known as Zaire. The UN can stay here--they're good for laughs. The feds stopped being funny when they started killing people and throwing them in the prison for having shotguns that were too short.

 

[alan]

Old Fluff:

I may be thickheaded but some things simply and plainly do not make sense, and or constitute open invitations to bureaucratic abuse. What used to pass for my "engineering background" is perhaps at fault. This sporting purposes business, nowhere in the law being defined, so far as I know, is a prime example thereof. The BATF is another, other than respecting their collection of alcohol and tobacco taxes, which amounts to their opening the envelope that contains the check, sent be the maker.

jimpeel:

Perhaps I didn't listen carefully enough, but I couldn't understand the sound file.

 

[Moparmike]

Gotta love Monty Python.

In the next "opression" thread, remind me to put that .wav from Holy Grail about opression and such.

Try this:

 

[Old Fuff]

alan:

I lifted this from the ATF website. The 1968 GCA is filled with "sporting" or "nonsporting" references. This is just one example:

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Firearms Technology Branch, Room 6450
650 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20226
(202) 927-7910

Important Restrictions

Licensed collectors may lawfully import curio or relic firearms other than surplus military firearms, nonsporting firearms, and NFA weapons. [A surplus military firearm is defined as one that belonged to a regular or irregular military force at any time. Alteration of the firearm does not change its status.

Therefore, a sporting firearm with a surplus military frame or receiver is a surplus military firearm, because a frame or receiver is classified as a firearm as described in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3).] Surplus military firearms are generally prohibited from importation under 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3).

However, 18 U.S.C. § 925(e) authorizes licensed importers (FFL type 08 or 11) to import surplus military rifles, shotguns, and handguns classified as curios or relics; provided that such handguns are generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.

Nonsporting handguns are those pistols and revolvers that do not meet size and safety prerequisites, or which do not accrue a qualifying score on ATF Form 4590, "Factoring Criteria for Weapons." Surplus military firearms classified as curios or relics must be in their original military configuration to qualify for importation

nonsporting firearms, (and so on .... and on ... and on.)

 

[SaintofKillers]

Wake up people

One point Id like to make is since when should I have to buy these rifles anyway? I already paid for those rifles, WITH MY TAX DOLLARS the 'gumint' should be driving around and handing the damn things out.:banghead: :banghead:

 

[alan]

Old Fluff:

Re your citations, interesting stuff, points taken, however it seems that the rules were changed later on, or by more recent legislation. Possibly I should check the C&R list myself, but have the Yougoslav M-48 Mauser Rifles made the list?

Also, at the risk of beating a dead horse, "mention" is one thing, a specific definition is another. What is, for instance, the rational basis for the BATF Point System, particularly respecting rifles? Then exactly what might it be that constitutes "sport", as in sporting use or sporting purpose, in the first place? Later on, there comes that business of "genereally recognized (by whom) as suitable for sporting purposes, or readilly adaptable thereto". So far as I know, nowhere in the law is this "readilly adaptable" business defined.

I have long been curious concerning the following. Were such things as this Point System specifically authorized in the legislation, or is it the end product of some bureaucrats wet dreams, the sort of foolishness that we get from things like "..and the secretary or his delegate shall promulgate regulations ..., which one can find in GCA'68?

In an earlier post, you made mention of the need to understand the mindset of the BATF. From where I sit, perhaps on/in a "bad chair", their mindset could be described as follows. That they are the Kings and or the rulers of all they see, and that the rest of us must grovel in the mud at the toe of their jackboots, hoping for sufference.

It might have been Lyndon Johnson who observed the following. It is not so much the good ends that might be obtained from the proper operadtion/enforcement of the law, it is the bad ends obtained from the improper operation/enforcement of the laws that must be guarded against. All to often , it is our Congress Critters that so blatantly fail in this regard.

Perhaps I've had a bad day.

 

[EOD Guy]

A couple of things to remember. Regardless of a couple of posts to this thread, all M14 rifles in government stocks are capable of full automatic fire with just the addition of a couple of parts which are readily available. It's a 10 minute job for any unit armorer. There were no modifications made to convert any M14's to semi-auto fire only. There was one rifle that I know of that was specifically manufactured as a semi auto rifle for competition use. The BATF still tried to get it destroyed and was only stopped when the owner beat the ATF in court. There was a proposal to modify some rifles for release to civilian shooters through the DCM but that proposal was shot down and never was implemented.

Second, the M14 is still a currently issued rifle and there is no surplus. The military can't meet their current needs with available stocks.

The petition that has been circulating lately is an old one and is just BS with no basis in fact.

 

[alan]

EOD GUY:

Re one part of your post: "all M14 rifles in government stocks are capable of full automatic fire with just the addition of a couple of parts which are readily available. It's a 10 minute job for any unit armorer. There were no modifications made to convert any M14's to semi-auto fire only", please advise me if it turns out to be that I'm all wet on this.

At the time when the M-14 rifle, originally designed as a selective fire weapon, it had through operation of a mechanical switch, full automatic fire capability, was "re-worked or modified" to fire semi-automatic only, not only were parts changed out, but a number of welds, 7 as I recall, were specified.

Assuming that the proceedure specified was followed, that could well be a large question, seems like restoration of automatic fire or selective fire capability would amount to a lot more than "the addition of just a couple of readily available parts", or the "10 minute job for a unit armorer". How many M-14's might be available, and or the condition of same, while interesting, are another matter entirely, as is the status of the petition you mentioned.

By the way, the position of those wonderful folks over at BATF, with or without the lately added "E", regarding these "readily available parts" is another thing. Remember how the sale and or possession of certain parts for M-16/AR-15 Rifles became "problematic", spelled illegal?