I am a member of the MIL-VEH mailing list, and I have just read about
the MVPA's decision to ban M-151 and HMMWV vehicles from judging in
MVPA-sponsored competitions. I am deeply disappointed in this
decision. I do not yet own any ex-military vehicles, but I hope to
restore a HMMWV someday when I can afford to, even if I have to weld
one together from cut-up pieces. I had been planning to seek out and
join the nearest MVPA chapter, but I have decided not to do that until
this ruling is reversed. I have not made this decision just because
the MVPA has banned the one vehicle which most interests me; the
banning of the M-151 concerns me just as much, even though I have no
personal interest in restoring one.
The MVPA's charter indicates that it is dedicated to the preservation
of military vehicles. To me, this means that the MVPA should advocate
the ownership and preservation of these vehicles in the face of any
opposition to this goal. Organizations like the MVPA are most needed
when people (whether they are closed-minded local governmental
agencies, unfriendly neighbors, hostile federal government agencies,
or anybody else) try to halt the preservation of these vehicles. By
caving in to pressure to make it difficult to own these
"controversial" vehicles, I do not feel that the MVPA is living up to
its own charter. How is a imported or demilled and then
legally-restored HMMWV or M-151 any more "dangerous" than the restored
M-48 tank parked next to an auto parts store a few miles from my home,
or the restored T-28B aircraft that one of my co-workers owns and
flies? How is a HMMWV on the road any more dangerous to its occupants
or other drivers than any of the beat-up old commercial trucks that I
see on the road every day?
Maybe the HMMWV is too new to be considered "historical", but that
will not be true in another 10 or 20 years. If military vehicle
enthusiasts do not work together to stop the destruction of the HMMWV
and other current military vehicles now, then there will be few if any
opportunities to restore them in the future.
Because I do not yet subscribe to your magazines, I have not heard
your side of the story first-hand. If I'm really far off the target,
then please state your case, either in a personal response to this
message or in a posting to the MIL-VEH list. Even though I strongly
disagree with the ruling, I'm at least willing to hear your side of
the argument.
Here's the bottom line: As long as this ruling stands, I will not join
the MVPA. If I learn that this ruling is reversed, then I will join
the MVPA. As a collector and restorer of ex-military radio gear, I
think I could contribute in a positive fashion to the goal of
preserving these vehicles now, even if I won't be ready to restore one
of my own for many more years.
I welcome any constructive criticisms or comments to my letter.
-- Mark J. Blair KE6MYK e-mail: mblair@gruumsh.irv.ca.us