Taking Action to Allow Import of 100,000 M-1 Rifles from Korea

Status
Not open for further replies.
Folks try to trim it down to 3 short paragraphs. Remember we're trying to "talk" to politicians and bureaucrats. ;)

Tell 'em what you're gonna tell'em. Tell'em. Tell'em what you told'em.

Ask them to respond to your question of why firearms the "greatest generation" won WWII with and the CMP has used for 40 50 years to teach Americans the sport of marksmanship and the fun of collecting AND that comply with the most stringent anti-firearms regulations in the country can not be imported into the United States for qualified citizens capable of passing a background check to own and shoot in competitions already using these firearms.
 
Last edited:
Now Fox News and Handgun Control Inc (Brady Campaign) have chimed in with seperate sources

Who? No one has commented. As Korean property, they can sell to the highest bidder in any country. The CMP has stated some time back they do not want them.
 
Hope you don't mind I used your letter. Sent to my Senators and Congressman.
 
Here's an alternative wording to MikeNice's well written letter to make it a rogue State Department issue.

Congressman XXXX,

It has come to the attention of the American public that the State Department has decided to bloc South Korea's sale of antique US Army rifles back to American collectors. I must say that this decision disheartens me for several reasons.

The first reason this decision shocks me is the stated reason for the change. A state department employee stated, "The transfer of such a large number of weapons -- 87,310 M1 Garands and 770,160 M1 Carbines -- could potentially be exploited by individuals seeking firearms for illicit purposes." This is absurd. The M1 Garand is a 10 lb, 43 inch long rifle with a unique enbloc clip that only holds 8 rounds of common hunting ammunition. The rifle does not have an external removable magazine of any capacity nor does it have a pistol grip. It is a hefty rifle of wood and steel and is wholly unsuited to use for “illicit purposes”. The M1 Carbine is a wood and steel rifle that is 36 inches long and does not have a pistol grip or folding stock. It was issued with a 15 round magazine, but it too is not suited for “illicit purposes”. Even the state of California doesn't deny their citizens access to these rifles. These types of transfers have taken place in the past where M1 Garands and M1 Carbines have been shipped to this country in large numbers. As we have seen over the years no blood baths have occurred when the rifles have been returned to the US and made available to the citizens who paid for them. The Civilian Marksmanship Program makes M1 Garands and M1 Carbines available to collectors and shooters alike. The CMP has been doing this for over 40 years and is an organization created by Congress to do so. Since "The Greatest Generation" first carried these rifles and CMP began interest in collecting and competing with these rifles has grown over the years. CMP's source of these rifles in recent years have been those returned from countries that the US had originally supplied after WWII. Just like these rifles in Korea.

The second reason this position makes no sense is that these are rifles that are of special interest to gun collectors and sporting enthusiasts. They represent a part of our national history that many American’s find interesting. More importantly, they represent a piece of our history that many Americans lived through. These are the rifles that many, still living, veterans carried into war in defense of this country. They are the rifles that our brothers, sons, fathers, and grandfathers carried. Some never came back. These rifles are a chance for a small piece of their legacy to be returned to their families. It is a chance to return their legacy to their fellow countrymen.

None of those things seem to matter to the State Department. They are now poised to allow this part of our history be destroyed. The same state Department employee that said these rifles pose a threat to American citizens has said , "We are working closely with our Korean allies and the U.S. Army in exploring alternative options to dispose of these firearms." They want to “dispose” of rifles that our soldiers carried through foreign lands in defense of family, friends, and allies. They want to erase the legacy of those that served proudly and those that gave the ultimate sacrifice. I find that shameful in ways I cannot describe.

There is another reason this angers me. Those weapons were paid for with American tax dollars. Citizens of this country paid for those rifles. Now they are being denied the right to have that property returned to America. They are being denied the right to own what we paid for and what they may legally possess. However, a government official now tells us we cannot have the opportunity to make them available to collectors and competitors in a government sponsored program such as the CMP. More over we cannot own them because of some improbable scenario where the rifle may be used for “illicit purposes.” That means all citizens are being denied their legal rights because of some bureaucrat who has no understanding of the nature of these rifles and imagines them to be suitable only for criminal use.

I eagerly await your support in demanding that the State Department reverse course on this decision and facilitate sale of these antique rifles to the American public.

Sincerely,
XXXXXXX
 
Last edited:
Awesome version HSO, I would copy yours but think sending a 2nd letter in 2 days for the same purpose might annoy more than help.
 
The re-importation of US made semi-auto milsurp weapons was outlawed in 1994 when Bill Clinton invoked the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA of 1968.

In 1989 the importation of foreign made semi-auto milsurp weapons were banned by Bush I under the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA of 1968.
 
The re-importation of US made semi-auto milsurp weapons was outlawed in 1994 when Bill Clinton invoked the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA of 1968.

In 1989 the importation of foreign made semi-auto milsurp weapons were banned by Bush I under the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA of 1968.

If that's the case then the administration should have cited the law that applies instead of making up a silly objection based on safety and criminals.
 
They may fall into a different category than modern military firearms
Fox said:
The Obama administration approved the sale of the American-made rifles last year. But it reversed course and banned the sale in March – a decision that went largely unnoticed at the time but that is now sparking opposition from gun rights advocates. A State Department spokesman said the administration's decision was based on concerns that the guns could fall into the wrong hands… Asked why the M1s pose a threat, the State Department spokesman referred questions to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. ATF representatives said they would look into the question Monday afternoon, but on Wednesday they referred questions to the Justice Department. DOJ spokesman Dean Boyd referred questions back to the State Department. According to the ATF Guidebook on Firearms Importation, it would normally be legal to import the M1s because they are more than 50 years old, meaning they qualify as "curios or relics." But because the guns were given to South Korea by the U.S. government, they fall under a special category that requires permission from the State Department before any sale… The Clinton administration blocked sales of M1s and other antiquated military weapons from the Philippines, Turkey and Pakistan. It also ended the practice of reselling used guns owned by federal agencies, ordering that they be melted down instead. In contrast, 200,000 M1 rifles from South Korea were allowed to be sold in the U.S. under the Reagan administration in 1987…
 
Hso, my version is a bit long winded. That is kind of my trade mark though. I thank you are right in saying keep it simple.

I like your rewrite of my version and have no issue with people using either version to e-mail their elected officials.
 
Thanks, Mike.

Heck, mine's long by my standards for politicians. Small words, simple declarative sentences, short paragraphs usually work the best for those folks.;)

I think we need to add the curio and relic angle as well. "Vintage" "Antique" "Relic of our fathers' sacrifice"
 
So far I have sent one version to two senators and a congressman, my wife sent another version to the same people, and I think my mom or dad is about to send hso's version to the same three. I learned from the best in the field, ACORN, but at least the names I am using are family members that are still alive.

Just imagine if all the active members of THR sent letters, might just make a difference.
 
As far as I'm aware, the State Department can't legally block importation of C&R-eligible guns.

I've sent emails to both Texas Senators; my congressman is strongly anti-gun and is running virtually unopposed for reelection so he won't care.
 
Last edited:
Folks,

Lets stay focused on ways to get our elected officials to force a change in the block by the state department and NOT get off topic onto politics.

Anybody have any "short and sweet" letter suggestions?

Any collector organizations like GCA or CMP that haven't heard about this yet? Any members of VFW, American Legion, AMVETS, etc. that can get their organizations hammering their congresscritters on this???
 
Last edited:
I sent emails of my own design with a more emotional bias to Senator Schumer D-NY and Gillibrant D-NY. :barf:

Their interns are probably going to laugh at my emails...
I hate NY! :banghead::banghead:
 
Hso, I used your language to email both Wisconsin sentators & my congresswoman. Not sure that will do much for two of them, but Senator Fiengold tends to be willing to listen on 2nd Amendment issues.
 
More Information

From Korean website The Chosun Ilbo:

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/09/03/2010090300985.html

Washington Vetoes Korea's Re-Sale of Old Rifles to U.S.

The U.S. administration has vetoed the Korean government's plan to sell some 100,000 old M1 rifles used during the Korean War back to the United States. It also banned 850,000 M1 rifles already imported from Korea and other countries from being sold to civilians.

A Korean government official said, "It's difficult to understand why the U.S. opposes the deal now, when we already shipped tens of thousands of these firearms to the U.S. in the early 1990s.

See link for full text.
 
A Korean government official said, "It's difficult to understand why the U.S. opposes the deal now, when we already shipped tens of thousands of these firearms to the U.S. in the early 1990s.

There is nothing difficult about it: It is US law. In 1994 the re-import of those guns into the US was stopped in its tracks when president Bill Clinton invoked the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA of 1968. This was not the first time that a US president stopped the import of milsurp firearms. In 1989 president Bush I stopped the importation of foreign made semi-auto milsurp guns by an administrative order.

The vast majority of M1 rifles and M1 carbines that came into the US in the early 90s were over priced junk.
 
"Guns that can take high-capacity magazines are a threat to public safety," said Dennis Henigan of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

What a self-serving benighted tool!!!
 
Here is the one reply out of the 3 e-mails I sent out. I used HSO's letter.He doesn't mention anything about these M1's.Oh well, It was nice to get a reply for once.

Thank you for contacting me in regards to my position on the Second Amendment. I appreciate the opportunity to share my views on this fundamental question with you.

As a gun owner and lifetime member of the NRA, I support the Second Amendment and every individual's right to keep and bear arms. When Charlton Heston defiantly announced that they could have his rifle when it was pried "from his cold, dead hands," he was not being dramatic, he understood that the right to own a firearm is the one right that protects all the others and defends our liberty. It is the only amendment that guarantees a citizen will always have recourse against an unjust authority.

During my time representing you in Washington, I have supported legislation that would have protected our Constitutional right to defend our homes and families, extended Second Amendment rights to the residents of the District of Columbia, and prevented an organized campaign to bankrupt gun manufacturers with frivolous lawsuits.

As the 111th Congress continues, there are many who are concerned that the unfettered power the majority party has will lead to an erosion of our rights to keep and bear arms. Already, Representative Bobby Rush (D-IL) has introduced H.R. 45, the Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. This bill would create a new federal firearms licensing program and a host of new federal gun crimes. I will oppose this measure, and all such measures that make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain firearms.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your views. Your opinions are important, so please continue to write, call, or email me with any concerns you may have in the future. For more information on my work in Congress visit the 11th District's Web site, http://conaway.house.gov or my blog at www.conawayblog.com.

Sincerely,

?
K. Michael Conaway
Member of Congress
KMC/KP


Sincerely,

K. Michael Conaway
Member of Congress
 
That is a form letter response out of the "Firearms letter response" file from your representative. A few more letters from other people to your representative might get the staffer to to pass something up the chain.
 
I got one too.

Thank you for contacting my office with your views on the Second Amendment. I find constituent input to be vital in the legislative process, and it is always good to hear from the people of North Florida.

As a sportsman and avid hunter, I share your sentiments that an individual's right to own a firearm should not be infringed upon. I am troubled by legislation that proposes a ban on weapons because of their appearance and not because of some unique characteristic that makes them more deadly or dangerous to use. Throughout my service in Congress I have continuously supported measures that protect Second Amendment rights and I will continue to oppose any bill or amendment that attempts to restrict the fundamental rights of law abiding gun owners.

Thank you again for bringing your views to my attention and adding your voice to the ongoing debate. Please continue to write to me, and I encourage you to sign up for my e-newsletter by visiting my website at www.house.gov/boyd.

Sincerely,

F. Allen Boyd, Jr.
Member of Congress
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top