Bill
---------------------- Forwarded by William R. Benson/PLG on 08/10/99 11:14
AM ---------------------------
William R. Benson
08/10/99 08:04 AM
To: "Steven P. Allen" <spallen@rolemail.ccis.edu>
cc:
Subject: Re: [MV] News-Mil Veh Imports to US (Document link not
converted)
Regarding the classification of MV's, one of the questions that should be
addressed right off of the bat is: How many MV collectors want their
vehicles to be outfitted with operational weaponry? MVs that can shoot are
a threat. If we can get away with having dummy ode-milled weapons on these
MVs (and I'm speaking of the weapons systems integral to the vehicle, like
the main gun in a turret, as opposed to pintle mounted weapons, which are
not organic to the vehicle design) it might go far in convincing the
legislature that we aren't a threat to law and order. (It would also
create a nice little niche for those willing to manufacture propane
operated fireing simulator for those who want to have the flash, the bang,
but not neccessarily to impact of their favorite weapons system.)
So: Who would be willing to forgo having operational weapons systems on
the MVs that they would import into the US?
As far as the unarmed vehicles, I personally don't see the problem. We
KNOW that jeeps have a tendency to roll when turned at high speed. They
weren't designed to travel at high speeds in the first place (except when
being chased by a ticked -off ME-109), so when somebody imports a jeep,
they sign a waiver saying that they are aware of the hazards of operating a
jeep. Same goes with the other stuff. I doubt if there are enough
operating MVs in the world to constitute a real threat to the automotive
industry...
Am I rambling, or am I on the right track here?
Bill
===
To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.