Lee wrote:
> ................... The MVPA and President Lee Holland has done a pretty
> decent job of trying to work
>with the government to resolve this issue. However, I don't think the
>government has worked with us in the same spirit or enthusiasm. Far from
>it... the proof is in the results............
Humm.......Just exactly what is the MVPA doing about this
issue? There has been very little info forthcoming about just what is
being said on our behalf to the Government Agencies. Yes, there has been
some information in the MVPA publications but is somewhat vague. I and
other members would like to know who the MVPA president and "concerned
members" have met with at the ATF or State Dept. and just what the MVPA is
proposing.
NOTE; I'm not looking to start a controversy here, I would just like
to be sure any agreement is run by the membership before it is agreed to on
our behalf.
In case you missed it, the May/June issue of Supply Line had a
small paragraph concerning these meetings that raised a red flag that we
may want to be completely informed about. In the paragraph was this .......
Quote: ".......The subject of the importation (or re-importation)
of US military material and weapons of war was opened by Lee Holland
distributing a copy of a letter sent to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms as a follow up to a meeting held by them and some concerned MVPA
members. The letter offered a suggestion of a PROCEDURE MUCH LIKE THAT
USED FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIREARMS, WHICH COULD BE USED TO CONTROL THE
ACQUISITION OF THE SUBJECT EQUIPMENT." ( emphasis is mine here)
End quote
Now, this raises a red flag for me as I am a Federal Firearms
License holder and I know just what is now required to purchase ANY firearm
no matter what state you are in.
You must have (and pass) a FBI background check (or State check)
before you can take possession of the firearm.
Is the MVPA and the "concerned members" suggesting the FBI and the ATF
now check us out before we can import these vehicles? I for one would like
to see this "proposal". Are we negotiating with the ATF here ? Are we
saying "if you let us import these vehicles we'll let you check out our
background? Is this really necessary just to import a CCKW for
example? What if a person has something in his background that prevents
him from "passing " the check. Will he then be "banned" from ever
possessing such vehicles as would happen with a firearm? This may be a
Pandora's box here.
Don't think so? The ATF could, after a"suggestion", realize
there are a whole lot of vehicles that are "implements of war" out there in
the public's hands and decide that they should know just who has them. (we
can't have them in the hands of criminals can we?). It would be a simple
thing to require them to be registered just to make sure. In fact, there's
a great list of over 8,000 owners of the things with addresses, phone
numbers, and a description of what they have......... It's called the
MVPA Directory! It's a simple thing to go over the pages and single out
the "bad" military vehicles from the "good". Them a letter is sent
informing the owner that the vehicle must be registered and a background
check must be done.
Never happen, can't be done, you say?
Ever heard of a 12 gauge shotgun called a "Street Sweeper" or
"Striker"? It was just a 12 gauge that happened to have a 12 shot
revolving cylinder just like a regular handgun. It wasn't full auto or any
more powerful than any other 12 gauge shotgun........it just looked
meaner! Well, in the spirit of gun control and to make the streets
safe(?), the ATF one day out of the blue, decided that it was no longer a
shotgun. Now it was a Destructive Device !! (even though shotguns are
exempt from the "over .50 cal rule") Now, a Destructive Device MUST be
registered with the ATF to be possessed. The owners of these guns now had
to go to their Police Departments and have the local Police chiefs sign the
federal forms so they could register them. Some Chiefs would not sign the
forms making the owners felons if they kept the gun. (the requirement of a
signature was later amended so these owners could register their D.D.)
Remember, these owners had lawfully purchased and owned a shotgun
one day and a Destructive Device the next. Now to sell it to someone else,
the buyer must go through a D.D. transfer too.
I would think that the details of a proposal that might make new
policies as to who could import or own M.V.'s should not be kept from the
membership. We should be fully informed as to any proposal that is
made. I'm sure that many of us would also like to know just who the
"concerned members" are that are part of this possible policy
making. (Earl Tucker, are you one?)
You MV owners here in Michigan had better take notice. You will NOT
pass the ATF/FBI check (should there be one) because there is a State law
prohibiting possession of these "Attack vehicles". Your paperwork will not
be approved.
For you MV owners who are not MVPA members and think this is nothing
that concerns you, think of this.......any policy change will affect all MV
owners wether they are in the MVPA or not.
Of course I could just be a little paranoid.......after all, the
Government is just here to help us........Right?
Jim Gilmore MVPA # 5843
Member Ist Michigan AOD Chapter MVPA
Great Lakes Chapter MVPA
Ohio Motor Pool Chapter MVPA
Red Ball Chapter MVPA
Ontario Military Vehicle Association
Midwest Military Vehicle Assocation
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2565 Wiethoff, Inkster, Mi. 48141
313-561-8826 voice 313-730-1652 fax
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 07 2000 - 22:15:54 PDT