Why is Obama administration blocking import of surplus [U.S.] rifles?

[DaveH]

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...surplus-rifles

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news...205_71329.html

SNIP
The U.S. government opposed South Korea’s bid to sell hundreds of thousands of aging U.S. combat rifles to American gun collectors, a senior government official said Thursday.
SNIP

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Mr7point62]

hmmmm... thats strange.... Maybe because the Obama administration wants to put the assault weapons ban, back into effect... I mean come one... Joe Biden hates guns, especially any type of combat rifle.

[Glock Block]

Man that really stinks! I can't begin to explain how much I would love to get my hands on a M1 Garand. My dream rifle

[GM]

Yes, it is bad, and IMO it will get even worse.

[Sig35seven]

Yes, it is bad, and IMO it will get even worse.

Why is it bad? Aren't things getting better for gun owners? It seems we have the most lenient guns laws in decades. Why should it get even worse? (just curious)

[retsupt99]

Why? ...made up problems. (And we have to pay these idiots?)

[rson63]

hmmmm... thats strange.... Maybe because the Obama administration wants to put the assault weapons ban, back into effect... I mean come one... Joe Biden hates guns, especially any type of combat rifle.

You never know what the obama administration will considers an assault weapon ? will they stop at just the AR style rifles or will the go after automatic shotguns/any rifle with a mag that hold over 3-4 rounds ?

[msgt/ret]

That rates up there with the current regime’s previous decision to crush and sell used brass as scrap, luckily that one was shot down. Maybe if they were routed through China then we would be allowed to import them.

[DaveJay]

Why is it bad? Aren't things getting better for gun owners? It seems we have the most lenient guns laws in decades. Why should it get even worse? (just curious)

While we have seen improvement in laws governing RTBA, it has not been due to the efforts of the current administration, but rather hard work by reasonable people in the various states, and a SCOTUS that is finally reading the Constitution, rather than putting their own spin on what they wish it said...

So, if this report is true, that the current administration is basically fabricating flimsy concerns to block bringing American rifles back so that law-abiding citizens can acquire these collectables, than this is a major concern...

[gasmitty]

Why is it bad? Aren't things getting better for gun owners? It seems we have the most lenient guns laws in decades. Why should it get even worse? (just curious)

It's bad because Bambi's administration is stopping the importation of guns which began their lives on our own shores... American-made M-1 Garands which were given or sold to an ally, South Korea. The veil-thin excuse is something about stopping the proliferation of weapons.

It's bad because very few with criminal intent will go out of their way to acquire a 50+ year-old, ten-pound military rifle which feeds from a fixed, non-removable magazine and which is in need of minor to major overhaul. Joe Dirtbag can find something far more compact and plenty powerful "on the street."

It's bad because a LOT of collectors, CMP competitors and guys like me who fancy milsurp firearms are willing to pay a fair farthing or more to own these rifles. In this day of government deficit, why not put a few hundred thousand dollars into the Treasury?

Lastly, and by far the most onerous, it's bad because there is no existing LAW which prevents the importation of these weapons. The aren't Saturday Night Specials, they vastly surpass the minimum size, weight and steel content requirements for imports, and they do not fit the "assault weapon" criteria that limits importation of certain semi-automatics. This is simply an edict by administrative fiat - basically, Bambi & Co are saying "because we said so, that's why."

That's what it's Bad, with a capital 'B.'

While it is true a number of gun laws have been relaxed over the past few decades, understand that most of those gains have occurred at the State and local level. Realistically, we have gained relatively little at the Federal level in the same time frame, 1968 to present.

[jwhite75]

It's bad because Bambi's administration is stopping the importation of guns which began their lives on our own shores... American-made M-1 Garands which were given or sold to an ally, South Korea. The veil-thin excuse is something about stopping the proliferation of weapons.

It's bad because very few with criminal intent will go out of their way to acquire a 50+ year-old, ten-pound military rifle which feeds from a fixed, non-removable magazine and which is in need of minor to major overhaul. Joe Dirtbag can find something far more compact and plenty powerful "on the street."

It's bad because a LOT of collectors, CMP competitors and guys like me who fancy milsurp firearms are willing to pay a fair farthing or more to own these rifles. In this day of government deficit, why not put a few hundred thousand dollars into the Treasury?

Lastly, and by far the most onerous, it's bad because there is no existing LAW which prevents the importation of these weapons. The aren't Saturday Night Specials, they vastly surpass the minimum size, weight and steel content requirements for imports, and they do not fit the "assault weapon" criteria that limits importation of certain semi-automatics. This is simply an edict by administrative fiat - basically, Bambi & Co are saying "because we said so, that's why."

That's what it's Bad, with a capital 'B.'

While it is true a number of gun laws have been relaxed over the past few decades, understand that most of those gains have occurred at the State and local level. Realistically, we have gained relatively little at the Federal level in the same time frame, 1968 to present.

and the congregation said "AMEN!!!"

[DaveH]

Why is it bad? Aren't things getting better for gun owners? It seems we have the most lenient guns laws in decades. Why should it get even worse? (just curious)

Name a good change introduced or supported by the current Federal administration.

SCOTUS = yes, Heller & McDonald.

Legislative branch = yes, NPS carry.

Lots of State level laws passed and signed.

[Eagleks]

that just sucks at so many different levels.....

[chiefjason]

Why is it bad? Aren't things getting better for gun owners? It seems we have the most lenient guns laws in decades. Why should it get even worse? (just curious)

When he supports gun rights for a longer length of time than he was against them I will be convinced he has seen the light. Apply the same logic to many of his inner circle or the higher ups in the House (particularly) and the Senate. Their stance on guns is very clear. It just so happens that the Credit Card Law was more important to them right now than the NPS Carry was.

The best predictor of future performance is past performance.

[moress]

I might be getting my info from the wrong guys, but from what I've heard else where on the interwebs regarding this subject is that the United States loaned Korea those rifles. The reason that they are not allowing them back into the U.S. is because they're trying to make a buck from U.S. owned property.

Then again I've also read that Korea technically is under no obligation to ever return these rifles back to the U.S. but they aren't allowed to sell them either.

Personally it makes sense, I mean I doubt the white house is really concerned about these 60 year old battle rifles, hell, we import old commie Mosin Nagants and buy them in Big 5's all over. I'm pretty sure they'll work it out somehow to get these guns back home in our hands. :)