[BEYU]

Thanks for the informative postings, alsaqr. I was not aware of the difference.

For those who are interested, I have composed a sample letter that can be used and edited by any of you and sent to your member of Congress. Remember, please, these weasels count on us to be apathetic.

Dear Senator/Congressman ———————:

It has recently come to my attention that the US Department of State is blocking the return of thousands of surplus M1 Garand rifles and M1 Carbines to the United States. Here is a link to an NRA news article on this subject:

NRA-ILA :: State Department Squirms On Garand And Carbine Imports

Apparently, the State Department is justifying the decision in the interest of "public safety".

Surplus military firearms are normally transferred to the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) which is authorized to repair and re-condition these weapons and then offer them for sale to approved purchasers. These weapons are historic artifacts — they are the guns that won World War II. It is difficult to imagine how those who would want to buy these firearms could be thought to constitute a danger to society. These buyers undergo an FBI criminal background check, and all must show proof of familiarity/training in the safe handling and use of firearms. Most buyers are veterans. We do not feel we are a danger to "public safety". On the contrary, many of us put our lives on the line for our country when we served.

These guns are living pieces of history that need to be preserved, they are not the type of weapons favored by criminals. The M1 Garand rifle is too long and heavy to be concealed, and would be much too awkward for a criminal to use. The M1 carbine is smaller, but lacks the firepower favored by criminals.

This decision by the State Department is a back door attempt at gun control. The issue should be discussed in the open, and the decision reached publicly, not in the dark of night by a select group of unelected bureaucrats.

Sincerely,

——————————

[Bigcountry02]

Thanks for the sample letter, New Mexico Senators and House of Representatives are pawns for the Big O administration.

They say they are pro-2nd Amendment and you see they voting history the words "BS" come to my mind.

[Angry_bald_guy]

All three of my representatives have been contacted.

Geoff Davis - R
Mitch McConnell - R
Jim Bunning - R

[TheOldMan]

Originally Posted by Angry_bald_guy

All three of my representatives have been contacted.

Geoff Davis - R
Mitch McConnell - R
Jim Bunning - R

Aready did the same for mine in Georgia..

[BEYU]

I received an email from Gun Owners Of America that warned the Obama administration may be thinking of melting down the M1 Garands and Carbines if they are returned from South Korea.

I found a news story that Fox News posted on this subject back on Sept 1st. Here's the link:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/01/obama-administration-reverses-course-forbids-sale-antique-m-rifles/

[Bigcountry02]

This was posted on the legislative ticker for the NRA.

News Releases - Press - United States Senator John Cornyn, Texas

Senators to Secretary Clinton: Backdoor Gun Ban Violates Americans’ Constitutional Right

Cornyn Leads Bipartisan Letter to Sec. Clinton on the Sale of Antique Rifles
Oct 06 2010
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) today led a bipartisan group of Senators including Senators Mike Enzi (R-WY), Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK), and others in sending a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, urging her to reverse the State Department’s reported decision to ban the sale of surplus antique rifles from South Korea to qualified buyers in the United States. The letter was also sent to Attorney General Eric Holder and Acting Director Kenneth Melson of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE).

Recent media reports indicate the Obama Administration inked a deal with the South Korean government to bring home nearly one million American-made WWII-era surplus military rifles. However, the State Department stepped in at the last minute and arbitrarily blocked the agreement. The rifles in question are the iconic M1 Garand and M1 Carbine rifles, which are popular among collectors and military historians. The letter to Secretary Clinton stresses that the sale poses no risk to Americans and the department’s decision violates law-abiding citizens’ constitutional right to purchase firearms for legitimate purposes. The full text of the letter is below:

October 6, 2010

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street, Northwest
Washington, DC 20520

[TheOldMan]

I'll not be holding my breath for her response. I'll just keep checking my email for letters from CMP..

[Bigcountry02]

Even with letters from the Senators and other non-grovernmental groups that want to preservation of the weapons, the BATF is not moving an inch. The administration is playing their anti-gun tactic.

I read an article last night on this, will dig to find it.

[BEYU]

Here's an update from the NAGR web site.

This is an excerpt from it:

Obama’s Ban on Historic Rifles

"...The National Association for Gun Rights first announced the situation regarding over 800,000 Korean War-era rifles in early September of this year. These rifles — over 87,000 M1 Garands and 770,000-plus M1 Carbines — had been given to South Korea during the late 1950s in order to assist their military against growing North Korean aggression. It became a story when South Korea tried to sell these rifles back to the United States to raise money, only to have their efforts blocked by the State Department for fear that they could “fall into the wrong hands.”

The tangled web of this issue, though, is more difficult to follow. For example, one investigative journalist uncovered some documentation from the MAP (Military Assistance Program), under which the rifles were given to South Korea. His findings were that they were never “sold” at all; they fell under a grant aid program run by the United States Army. In short, we still own them.

The obvious question then becomes: How could the State Department block the sale of something that cannot be sold? If the Army still owns them, isn’t it their responsibility to take possession of these historical artifacts and ensure their care?..."

This is a link to the entire article:

http://www.nationalgunrights.org/m1-ban/

Perhaps if it can be shown that the U.S. still owns these weapons, then they are eligible to be handled the same way surplus military arms are usually handled?