Ethical Question

If it were available to me, it's already been paid for and out of the hands of 'bad' people by at least one middleman. So it's 'just' a gun. I don't go out of my way to buy from terrorists, but all I know about a lot of my guns is that they had at least one previous owner and PROBABLY not associated with a crime. I don't buy Nazi helmets or Totenkopf pins but I would love to have a Nazi era Luger, P-38 , a Gerwehr or Mauser rifle.
 
Sort of inspired by, but not limited to, the ongoing events in the Middle East:

Would you deliberately seek to own a gun or tool surplused from an organization that (likely) committed human-rights abuses?

For example, there’s a lot of third-generation S&W semiautomatics coming back in and floating around places like Robinson Trading Post in decent shape. As a firearm, there’s nothing wrong with them, and most have been carried a lot and shot a little. But in the back of my head, I don’t know if I’m super-comfortable carrying something that was used as a facilitator for what I personally don’t agree with. For the same reasons, I haven’t picked up any German Russian-capture milsurps…as much as I love them (and I do), I don’t want them enough to buy them.

I don’t believe in ghosts or bloody nightmares, but I also don’t want Bull Connor’s nightstick or the Trapdoor from Wounded Knee in my karma…

What are your thoughts?
A firearm is a tool. Some use it for unlawful purposes, others use it for self defense or simple target shooting. The firearm itself is completely innocent of any and all nasty deeds that were associated with it. The nasty comes from the individual with the firearm in their hand. The firearm knows nothing but to do whatever the person holding it wants it to do. It is 100% blameless. Without a human to pick it up and shoot it, it will simply sit on the counter or wherever it is and be 100% harmless. So in regards to your mental breakdown, forget about who might have previously owned it, buy it and use it for peaceful and legal purposes.
 
I bought a Charter Arms 44spl Bulldog just like Son of Sam, should I be ashamed of myself? It is a really good shooter. That and my son's dogs have not told me to go out and kill someone. Reality is what you make of it. Woof woof
 
I have lots of books on the Third Reich, even have a copy of Mein Kampf. Doesn't make me a Nazi.
Started studying Russian in 1963, have a copy of The Communist Manifesto. Doesn't make me a
Communist.
These are historical artifacts and should be preserved as such.
 
I have a 98k with Waffenamt stamps, I didn't buy the rifle because of them and they never bothered me. Having a cool, historical rifle to take out to the range isn't the same as supporting the cause that commissioned the rifle 80 years ago. The fact that a tool of war of the "thousand year reich" wound up as a plinking rifle in America seems somehow fitting.

I have a Mosin-Nagant rifle and an 1895 Nagant revolver, both made in Russia. They both have Finnish capture marks and that is why I bought those particular pieces. I grew up in an area where there were a lot of people of Finnish heritage. I studied Finnish history and have a great admiration for the way the Finns stood up to the Russians in the 1939 Winter War. So in honor of the Finns I have those pieces that the Finns captured from the Russians.

Both of my Mosins are Russian with different Finnish capture markings. I didn't realize they were Finnish when I bought them, but that was a nice bonus.

When the Israelis were equipping themselves for their War of Independence in 1948 they use large numbers of Mauser 98ks.

Back in the '90s there were some 98ks making the rounds on the surplus market that had been converted to .308 by the Israelis. I got a kick out of the fact the Waffenamt stamps had all been carefully ground off and replaced by the Star of David. I would have bought one, but they were all pretty worn out. I imagine those rifles had seen quite a bit of use.
 
I have a 98k with Waffenamt stamps, I didn't buy the rifle because of them and they never bothered me. Having a cool, historical rifle to take out to the range isn't the same as supporting the cause that commissioned the rifle 80 years ago. The fact that a tool of war of the "thousand year reich" wound up as a plinking rifle in America seems somehow fitting.



Both of my Mosins are Russian with different Finnish capture markings. I didn't realize they were Finnish when I bought them, but that was a nice bonus.



Back in the '90s there were some 98ks making the rounds on the surplus market that had been converted to .308 by the Israelis. I got a kick out of the fact the Waffenamt stamps had all been carefully ground off and replaced by the Star of David. I would have bought one, but they were all pretty worn out. I imagine those rifles had seen quite a bit of use.
I remember reading a story about early Israeli soldiers being trained in the method of using a rock or brick on the bolt handle to open and close the rifle bolt. Fire it, hammer the bolt open, then hammer it closed to fire again.
 
One thing I know for sure is that none of the guns used by bad people squeezed their own trigger. As a milsurp collector I have guns from all over the world that may, or may not, have been used in all kinds of nefarious events. So what? What's done is done, and there's nothing you or I can do about it now.
 
I've owned Nazi marked firearms. I've owned ChiCom firearms. My grandson has a Waffen SS helmet in original condition with the original liner. I don't see how any organization could be worse than those I've named.

Short answer, no.
 
Was it last year, when a Bonnie & Clyde gun came to auction? I think it went for near 1/4 million$$$$$$.
 
Firearms are objects. If we give them totemic significance, that speaks more to our own ethics and morality, not the "evilness" of the object. Evil is an issue of the heart, not the tool used.

There are very few objects that can only be used for evil, and sadly none that can only be used for good.
 
A gun is no more responsible for what the owner does with it than the manufacture. A revolver has no concision, to it a round fired at a target is not one bit different than one fired and killing an innocent person.
 
Back
Top