Inland RRA Rebuild, DCM Or Not?

[INLAND44]

The DCM carbines of the early sixties were sold off because they were deemed" unserviceable". This was because they had never been through an arsenal rebuild. I have observed many carbines that don't make "sense". They have a mixture of early and late features. Type one band and safety, but a late adjustable rear sight is common. Many with highwood stocks. The rear sights were often replaced at the unit level I am told. If you carbine has a rebuild mark then at the very least the stock has been though and arsenal rebuild. I have bought some primo highwood stocks from people who said the carbine it came from was a DCM. They just changed because they wanted a different stock at the time. The possibilities are endless. You carbine might be a DCM but will probably never be proven to be so. Anything is possible in the world of the M1 Carbine. I guess I should just say in my opinion you carbine is not a DCM. Others can disagree with everything I said but that's ok by me.

I'm quite sure that very many rebuilds/updated carbines were included in the sale. With very few exceptions, they had been used in WWII, updated/rebuilt, then used in Korea, possibly being redone again. These were simply carbines from long-term storage that were deemed 'surplus'. The use of the term 'unserviceable' was simply a means by which to surplus-out the carbines while satisfying the 'bean-counters'. They definitely were 'serviceable' in every respect. The same term was used to surplus-out thousands of U.S. pistols during the same period, some of which had never even been issued (the perfect late Remington Rands for example), along with the majority which were rebuilds.
So the term 'unserviceable' on these invoices has no meaning in the technical sense relative to suitability for use.