Ethics Question For Military Collectors Please Read and Respond

It's always better to find a collector's item a good home IMO. You don't have control over this most of the time. If you really want to make sure it is preserved, give it to a museum (and even then - it may get deativated!).
 
It's always better to find a collector's item a good home IMO. You don't have control over this most of the time. If you really want to make sure it is preserved, give it to a museum (and even then - it may get deativated!).

I am now as we speak trying to donate a P14 to a military museum. They want it but it will probably have to be dewatted but I don't want to pay for that and they aren't sure yet if they can accept a functioning piece. I guess I haven't talked to the right person yet.
 
If a buyer was stupid enough to tell me that, I would sell it to them, but I would insist on a non-refundable "devaluation deposit" equal to and on top of my asking price.
In other words, charge them double.
 
I would rather give a nice rifle to a friend or someone that I know will use and preserve it then sell it at a huge profit margin to a person that will ruin it.

I do agree that a person is free to do whatever they wish with their own property, but I'm not going to facilitate the butchering of a nice rifle!
 
.
If we are serious Milsurps Collectors, then part of our obligations is to preserve History. In reality, we do not "own" anything - we merely have the pleasure of being Custodian of something over a period of time, and in most cases when we depart this World, someone else will own that object.

People here are mentioning "unless it is a SKS or a Mosin-Nagant." I would say that these two Russian Milsurps are the equivalent of the Lee Enfields, Mausers and Milsurp Bonanza of the 1955 to 1965 Era, and where are these earlier imported Milsurps today, and what is the asking price of some of them?

Now that I am a lot older, I seem to appreciate our Heritage and History a lot more, and find that I gravitate toward projects that will preserve some of that History, both local and Canadian. SMELIE and I spent three years in obtaining a particular rifle for one of the Military Museums, and we consider it time well spent.

Contrary to the View of preservation, is the idea that when something is bought and paid for, then you can do whatever you like with it. With these people going Ga-Ga over some Basement Bubba taking a scarce Milsurp firearm, chopping up the wood, cutting the barrel, and installing a Chinese made Leupold scope copy on top, then painting it Camouflage or Black.

Personally, I like the idea of telling a prospective buyer that you could find him a suitable rifle for him to Sporterize, and explain that a lot of the value of your particular rifle is in the uniqueness and intact condition. And, it will cost the Buyer only 1/3 to 1/2 of the money he would pay for your rifle. I also like the idea of looking at other avenues in which to sell the rifle - at the same price.

It might also reflect upon the financial condition of the Seller. We all have had to sacrifice a beloved object throughout our lives, in order to obtain money for something. I have had to sell of a lot of my earlier rifles because of a shortfall of cash, and at the time I usually broke even or made a modest profit on them. But the Present and the Future are two different things, and selling a No.4 Lee Enfield Sniper Rifle for $200 when I paid $50 for it provided a good profit and brought in some needed money at the time.

.
 
there are enough buyers out there, so i can choose to avoid selling a collectable rifle to someone who openly tells me he'll destroy it. I do think we have a collective responsibility to protect history. This being said, as mentioned above, once it's in someone else's hands... It's out of mine.

x2.
 
"...Or just sell the barreled action..." You wouldn't get what a 'matching' milsurp is worth if you do that. If you sell one for what it's worth, what do you care if the buyer ruins his investment?
 
I have never needed money badly enough to make a sale with which I was truly uncomfortable.
When I had my business, I sold a lot of guns that I knew would be used up and ruined in short order.
If the rifle is a quality collector's piece, I'd sell it to someone who would appreciate it, rather than someone who would break it for its parts.

absolutely agree...
 
You can really tell where people stand with a thread like this. I'm starting to learn now that the 'investment' is more of a justification of the purchase than anything. There are a few pieces that have skyrocketed but it seems to me like most pretty well stay on par with inflation. Those who take the stand that who cares what happens to it after its gone obviously don't care about where its been, the things it has done or witnessed etc. it's the history behind a milsurps that draws me in, not necessarily its rising price tag.

Buffdog your last couple lines in your post made me hurt for you! That's really too bad you had to let it go!
 
I have spent the last 50 years, or most of it, trying to preserve a few of these historic pieces and I see no reason to change course now.

The money? I can make-do without it, have done so at times.

At times, I have BOUGHT guns I didn't need, just to keep them off the market because they were too tempting to Bubba. As a result, I am sitting on Brazilian 1908 Mauser/Mauser Number 25, a helluvva nice sportered Sparkbrook (done about 1920) and a few others that don't fit into World War One. And I have GIVEN rifles to people who NEEDED one and didn't have the cash; a case in point involves a local small farmer who was going broke because of what the coyotes were doing to his cattle. A badly-used SMLE with a really decent bore was refurbed and got a new crown, trigger job and found a new home and the Problem was SOLVED about 8 rounds later.

Money ain't everything. Personally, I would rather have a beat-up SMLE or Ross than just another pink plastic picture of a dead Liberal Prime Minister.

ALBAYO, thanks for this thread. In trying to preserve some of these historical articles, I am sure that many of us have felt, at times, that we must be alone. This thread proves that there are more of us than most of us thought. I thank you for that.
 
I would tell the guy to piss off. That's just dumb.
Its like ricing up a 1965 Vette.

If I ever had an inkling that someone was goning to ruin it, I'd just keep it.

My friend had an amazing, unfired since factory PORT contract k98k. He really wanted to drill it for scope, he was obsessed with having a matching bolt/rec if he was going to scope it.....I finally convinced him to not with a big wad of money.
 
As this is posted in the milsurp section of the forum, I'm sure most of us realize, though we purchased these firearms, we are in a way custodians of history. I doubt many of us would part with a good milsurp to turn it into a custom sporter. My preference is to preserve the firearm without altering it, definitely not drilling and tapping.
 
I would not sell to someone with those intentions. Also some are saying common sks's, lets remember when people were saying that about enfields 40 years ago.... Z

Cheers, McLean
 
The government firearms restrictions have done more to destroy military collectables than bubba!! Re-classing firearms has made passing them down generations a thing of the past. All machine guns in Canada are all on the clock because everyone is getting old. Converted-auto's are now on the clock also. in 30 years all of it will be gone. I have had collectables for most of my life and I might as well cut them up myself rather than wait for the crown to do it.
 
As military collectors, part of our goals with our collections should be the preservation of history. Each time a milsurp is destroyed or sporterized an irreplaceable part of history is gone. Like Buffdog said, we are but temporary custodians of these wonderful pieces of history and its our responsibility to take the best care of them that we can.
 
Back
Top Bottom