Snelling has to give up their 1903s

I seem to recall our VFW wanting new rifles and not being able to get them. This was all about 20 years ago and they had a dozen Krags they wanted to get rid of. I think part of the problem was no one knowing exactly what to do to get them and they did eventually get them upgraded to 03's. They were for a time under the impression they could sell them and buy new ones. So it isn't to be unexpected that these organizations don't think they actually own the rifles. They've possessed them for many decades and those that acquired them are probably long gone.

I see nothing shameful in the government trying to get back what it owns, especially when they are replacing them with newer models. Isn't really a money making venture, they could probably get more for the garands considering the bore conditions most of these ceremonial rifles are in.

Bottom line is people don't like change much, yet change happens whether you like it or not.

Some who apparently struggle with logic act as though this was some random act of nature. It wasn't. And worries about '03s disappearing is somehow assumed not to apply equally to Garands? Somebody clue me in on how that shakes out logically.

Almost zero vets would know the difference between an '03 bolt and an 03A3 one. That makes the parts availability question borderline silly. I guess the geniuses that came up with this policy were too busy surfing the 'net for porn to check '03 parts availability on Gunbroker.

A simple two part change in policy that could have been thought up by a 4th grader (so I qualify) would have cured the problem: 1) tell posts of the long term concern about parts availability and get the officers of the post to acknowledge in writing that the army has no spare parts to offer; 2) do a physical inventory at each post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calif-Steve

The Army wants all of the older bolts guns turned in. They are issuing Garands, which they have a small parts float. There are no spare Krag bolts or '03 bolts around. I understand CMP is now supporting this program and they are very good about helping out Vet organizations. I am not so sure what is shameful, but if you say so, then I'll agree. Mind you, I served in Viet Nam and am rather pro-vet.

---

Calif-Steve: You miss the point, perhaps in your neck-o-the-woods the vets doing these burial services are content with the M-1 rifle, but many of the older vets have developed a real fondness for the 03/03A3. To them it is a ceremonial rifle that is much easier to use and to maintain. If there is a failure with an 03/03A3 it is usually much easier for these guys to clear and get it working during the ceremony than an M-1. Have you ever seen an older vet struggle with trying to work the bolt on an M-1? I have when I was looking for a place to bury my Dad. I watched a ceremony where the vets used a mix of Springfields and Garands, all personally owned I learned. One of the Garands jammed and they had a heck of a time clearing it so much so that I wanted to jump in and help but I didn't feel right doing that. My Dad served towards the end of WW II and he carried an 03A3 in basic at Fort Knox and was then given a Garand for a short time and when he went overseas he was issued an M-1 carbine. The one he really liked was the M-1 carbine because it was light and easy to carry around. He was a artillaryman serving a 105mm. Anyway, years later I showed him some of the rifles in my small collection and he would comment about how heavy the Garand was and that he must have been a lot stronger "back then" as he put it. He played heck trying to work the bolt on the Garand but when I gave him a 03/03A3 he instinctively knew how to work the bolt and to him the rifle felt much lighter than the Garand.

So you can feel the way you want on this issue but I firmly believe these burial units have earned the right to use the 03/03A3's if they want. Some like yourself will claim the Army owns them and can call them back anytime they want. No, the Army really doesn't own them, the taxpayers do. We paid for them and as long as they are not dangerous weapons capable of full auto fire, I think the vets doing this service should be able to make the call on keeping them. Somehow people always seem to forget who REALLY owns stuff our military buys. They buy it, but WE own it.

Lastly, I don't buy for a second they can't get spare parts. There are a ton of spare parts floating around for the 03/03A3's. True the Army may not have parts in the system for these rifles but they are readily available and I think replacement parts support could and would come from many, many sources to keep these ceremonial rifles working. It is also a lot more difficult to keep an M-1 running than an 03/03A3. Ask yourself which rifle is more accomodating in shooting blanks....the M-1 or the 03A3? That answer alone should take care of this issue. And I served in the military too and spent 30 years in law enforncement afterwards, but all that doesn't mean a thing because I am not the one doing these ceremonies.
Respectfully, Rick

Its Army logic to turn-in and re-issue. Hard to understand, for sure. I'll guess the organizations who want to keep their '03's will be allowed to do so. Actually the Army does keep track of these things, but that was in times past. I wonder how many organizations turned in their Krags but really wanted to keep them. No Krag blanks for years. The Dealers Warehouse in Modesto gives blanks away to the local VFW. I suspect .30-'06 blanks are getting scarce. My buddy told me that in Hawaii some years back a local VFW turned in their '03's to the National Guard. Who promptly cut them in half. Oh, well.

My opinion is to let em keep them as long as they want. If maintenace is a problem, I have no doubt that many here would put up the $$ or the parts if asked. If cmp supporting them with other turn in's means a few less guns for the mass's, fine! These guys have served double duty and there is no way we can ever fully repay them other than support them in any way we can.
How about a little common sense and less bureaucratic crap!

Happy New Year

Kurt

They get to keep them! :super:

http://www.startribune.com/politics/blo ... 80184.html

Our American Legion post has 1917s left over from the previous era, and a rack of Garands. The Garands sometimes fail to feed, because of semi-dud blanks. Blank adaptors were bought from GunParts. Bad news is all the 1917s have totally trashed bores, and some went missing when Honor Guard members died. Good news is, nobody knows where the records are for these old rifles. New members want AR15s, with some under the impression that the Army is giving out M16s for honor guards.....not too likely. I just tell the newbies that they just suck it up, and learn to handle a MAN"S RIFLE, dammit!
PS: One old rifle is a O3A3, with a good bore...I asked the commander, and he said that was old so-and-so's rifle, and he cleaned it, because he went deer hunting with it!

No M16's coming as the Army is out of the program. CMP runs it now and they have Garands. I used to know a gun show dealer who always had '03's for sale. I asked where they were coming from and he told me he would seek out VFW guys and buy their Army rifles. I asked him if it the stuff was actually Army property and he decided he didn't want to talk to me anymore!

As far as I know this is the only place to requisition rifles for an American Legion Post, and the M1 Garand is the only rifle available.http://http://www.amvets.org/programs/ceremonial_rifles.html