CMP 1911s not selling to MA in 2021

[PatMcD]

I am reading through this thread that these are all GI guns, which of course, were paid for by US taxpayers.

Yet here we are being asked to pay for something that we already paid for. Hmmmm why shouldn't these guns be returned to taxpayers who paid for them originally? Why do we have to pay for them again?

Would even be willing to pay the costs of the arsenal refinishing that many of them have. Even though as a taxpayer the armed forces received the guns I paid for in new condition.

Help me understand where I am wrong here
.

No disrespect intended, but there are very, very few of us alive that "paid" for Garands when they were last produced for the Govt. And even if we were, how much actually came out of my or your pocket? $1.32? 75 cents? Less? Do you think they should resell them back to the public at that price? OK, add in inflation, now we're up to $12.

Recent films and books about WWII have done more for Garand sales than anything, and the CMP made a marksmanship "want" for these rifles with their "Games" matches. However, the main purpose of the sales is to generate money to fund all CMP activities in perpetuity.

Marksmanship with the Garand via the "Games" matches is a small percentage of their activities in this area. The Junior programs have nothing to do with M1's. Neither do the Distinguished programs and the National Trophy Matches (other than the National "Games" matches being held in conjunction with them).

People may or may not participate in CMP marksmanship activities (I would encourage all to at least try it), but you can still buy firearms from them at a price point lower than the open market.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

No, a few years ago when I bought my first 2 Garands they were $650 for service grade.

What are you arguing? The price of surplus guns or whether $650 is a lot? When was "a few years ago"?

 

[jpm]

If you apply the 'we already paid for it and should get it free' logic then I'd like a retired B52 please.

 

[67ray]

No disrespect intended, but there are very, very few of us alive that "paid" for Garands when they were last produced for the Govt. And even if we were, how much actually came out of my or your pocket? $1.32? 75 cents? Less? Do you think they should resell them back to the public at that price? OK, add in inflation, now we're up to $12.

Recent films and books about WWII have done more for Garand sales than anything, and the CMP made a marksmanship "want" for these rifles with their "Games" matches. However, the main purpose of the sales is to generate money to fund all CMP activities in perpetuity.

Marksmanship with the Garand via the "Games" matches is a small percentage of their activities in this area. The Junior programs have nothing to do with M1's. Neither do the Distinguished programs and the National Trophy Matches (other than the National "Games" matches being held in conjunction with them).

People may or may not participate in CMP marksmanship activities (I would encourage all to at least try it), but you can still buy firearms from them at a price point lower than the open market.

Taxes are not levied in equal dollars across the population either. And neither are the benefits that they fund. So what is your point?

I'm still looking for a valid legal precedent or other example showing why we should pay for something that we paid for before. This isn't like vehicles seized from drug lords, or property escheated by the Commonwealth. The government is now selling goods paid for by taxpayers and keeping the revenues. Regardless of what that money is used for, that isn't right.
.

 

[jpm]

The government is now selling goods paid for by taxpayers and keeping the revenues. Regardless of what that money is used for, that isn't right.

Here's the problem with your argument, the government is NOT selling the CMP guns. The CMP is not a government organization and the government donated them to this organization.

 

[jpm]

What are you arguing? The price of surplus guns or whether $650 is a lot? When was "a few years ago"?

A few years ago is like 6ish, and no $650 is not a lot. It was about the same price as a new common 9mm semiauto.

 

[Mountain]

Here's the causal thread:

*The US never sold surplus guns en masse to companies like Interarms, though there was a period where Garands and 1911s were on the surplus market.

*Gun companies lobbied Congress to restrict future access by companies like Interarms to US surplus guns, both here and in foreign sources, because surplus guns undercut sales by SAAMI members.

*The only source for US surplus guns is the CMP, who sets a price floor. They sell "below market price" because they establish market price. No one else can sell surplus US guns direct from US military sources.

The CMP sets the price floor. If the millions of M1s and 1911s were released onto the market by private sellers, which would be the most capitalistic and efficient manner of getting guns into civilian hands, there wouldn't be a price floor and market equilibrium would be much lower. The US made approximately 5.45 million M1s - in comparison, there's about 11 million Remington 870s. Obviously 870s and M1s aren't apples to apples comparisons, especially with regard to rare variants of each, but I'm willing to bet that market equilibrium on a shooter-grade M1 would be lower if the guns were sold to a surplus dealer.

And just to be super clear, pricing is a form of gun control. The lowest Garand CMP price I'm aware of is from a few years ago, I remember $650 for a field grade. $650 is a lot of money to many gun owners, especially young and novice gun owners.

While that's logical and certainly plausible, do you think if Sweaty Ben gets his hands on containers of M1's that they would sell for less than $650?



LOL, no. Neither would Classic bother to check for function and correct like CMP does. No way in hell would Classic make right any problems discovered by the new owner, as CMP readily does.

The other issue is that there are not stockpiles of these firearms sitting in one place by the millions. Korea probably has the single largest pile of M1's and carbines, at ~80K and 600K, respectively. There were ~13K M1's returned from Turkey and ~86K from the Philippines. Tough to say what is going to happen with the Korean stuff. I'd certainly welcome some distributor whether CMP or not bringing in a bunch of carbines at reasonable pricing but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[PatMcD]

Taxes are not levied in equal dollars across the population either. And neither are the benefits that they fund. So what is your point?

I'm still looking for a valid legal precedent or other example showing why we should pay for something that we paid for before. This isn't like vehicles seized from drug lords, or property escheated by the Commonwealth. The government is now selling goods paid for by taxpayers and keeping the revenues. Regardless of what that money is used for, that isn't right.
.

Oh, I see now. You just want all surplus weapons to be given away free to all taxpayers who just ask for them. Gotcha.

P.S. the US Govt ISN'T selling them; they are donated to a separate entity for basic funding purposes. That separate entity (the CMP) arguably uses the sales to fund a program that benefits the country as a whole.

Don't like it? Go talk to your Senator and get it changed so you get one for free.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

A few years ago is like 6ish, and no $650 is not a lot. It was about the same price as a new common 9mm semiauto.

You're not grasping the logic. The CMP is an organization dedicated to promoting marksmanship, especially among young people. Young people as gun owners do not typically spend around $500-1000 on guns. If they did, where are all the new, budding shooters with their CMP-sourced guns?

Think about it this way - Mosins, not Garands, created a new generation of millennial milsurp collectors. If you offer a young person who makes a minimal income the choice between a $100 Mosin (say in 2010) or a $650 Garand, which would they choose? The answer and reality was the cheap Mosin.

While that's logical and certainly plausible, do you think if Sweaty Ben gets his hands on containers of M1's that they would sell for less than $650?

View attachment 426469

LOL, no. Neither would Classic bother to check for function and correct like CMP does. No way in hell would Classic make right any problems discovered by the new owner, as CMP readily does.

The other issue is that there are not stockpiles of these firearms sitting in one place by the millions. Korea probably has the single largest pile of M1's and carbines, at ~80K and 600K, respectively. There were ~13K M1's returned from Turkey and ~86K from the Philippines. Tough to say what is going to happen with the Korean stuff. I'd certainly welcome some distributor whether CMP or not bringing in a bunch of carbines at reasonable pricing but I'm not holding my breath.

Sweaty Ben isn't the epitome of how to do business in any way. My original point was that the CMP serves a purpose of creating a price floor that the private market can't go below. I have no illusions of government turning over surplus guns to private business like what happened in the 40s, 50s, and 60s, I'm just trying to point out inherent quirks in the system and explain why those quirks exist.

Regarding the numbers, if someone dropped say 25,000 guns, I bet that'd make a nice dent in demand. Realistically, how many collectors are there out there? Nick said 18,000 applications for 8,000 1911s. So, releasing tens of thousands of guns on the private market should at least satiate demand temporarily, with hypothetical recurring releases driving down demand and increasing supply.

 

[majspud]

Add a few hundred more applications for MA...obviously, I didn't send mine in.
t

 

[PatMcD]

You're not grasping the logic. The CMP is an organization dedicated to promoting marksmanship, especially among young people. Young people as gun owners do not typically spend around $500-1000 on guns. If they did, where are all the new, budding shooters with their CMP-sourced guns?

Think about it this way - Mosins, not Garands, created a new generation of millennial milsurp collectors. If you offer a young person who makes a minimal income the choice between a $100 Mosin (say in 2010) or a $650 Garand, which would they choose? The answer and reality was the cheap Mosin.



Sweaty Ben isn't the epitome of how to do business in any way. My original point was that the CMP serves a purpose of creating a price floor that the private market can't go below. I have no illusions of government turning over surplus guns to private business like what happened in the 40s, 50s, and 60s, I'm just trying to point out inherent quirks in the system and explain why those quirks exist.

Regarding the numbers, if someone dropped say 25,000 guns, I bet that'd make a nice dent in demand. Realistically, how many collectors are there out there? Nick said 18,000 applications for 8,000 1911s. So, releasing tens of thousands of guns on the private market should at least satiate demand temporarily, with hypothetical recurring releases driving down demand and increasing supply.

Follow along with me: the the Rifles and 1911's are FOR FUND RAISING PURPOSES ONLY. There are no junior programs that revolve around the Garand or 1911. They are primarily involved with airguns and smallbore rifles (which the CMP also sells). In reality, the guns that are appropriate for serious marksmanship training cost far more than a $650 M1.

The CMP is not in business to create milsurp enthusiasts of any age, rich or poor.

For the most part, the guns being sold by the CMP are affordable to the vast majority of their primary buying audience; white-haired retirees with money to spend.

P.S. your example of the $100 Mosin and the $650 Garand is actually a pretty good representation of their relative worth. I know many youngsters who would rather save up a little longer to afford a CMP M1 than to drop $100 on a throw-away piece of junk.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

The CMP is not in business to create milsurp enthusiasts of any age, rich or poor.

And that's my problem with it. Selling inexpensive milsurps, say $100-500, is a gateway drug to shooting and gun ownership. Selling guns for retirees to fawn over and stuff in a safe doesn't create new shooters, except if maybe the gun gets shot by someone else.

My interest is in spreading the joy of getting people into old guns. Not in making guns into things like classic cars, something that rarely sees the light of day and costs a lot.

 

[Mountain]

P.S. your example of the $100 Mosin and the $650 Garand is actually a pretty good representation of their relative worth. I know many youngsters who would rather save up a little longer to afford a CMP M1 than to drop $100 on a throw-away piece of junk.

Hey now- kicking the humble Mosin is going too far. Try doing this at 100 yards with an untouched field grade M1 & original WWII barrel:

 

[PatMcD]

And that's my problem with it. Selling inexpensive milsurps, say $100-500, is a gateway drug to shooting and gun ownership. Selling guns for retirees to fawn over and stuff in a safe doesn't create new shooters, except if maybe the gun gets shot by someone else.

My interest is in spreading the joy of getting people into old guns. Not in making guns into things like classic cars, something that rarely sees the light of day and costs a lot.

I understand, but like I said, the CMP was not chartered to "get people into old guns". Collecting cheap, old guns has, in no way, anything to do with marksmanship and training.
There is a market for the surplus guns they sell. Those sales fund their activities and efforts. That's really all there is to it; they are a revenue source.

 

[mac1911]

I am reading through this thread that these are all GI guns, which of course, were paid for by US taxpayers.

Yet here we are being asked to pay for something that we already paid for. Hmmmm why shouldn't these guns be returned to taxpayers who paid for them originally? Why do we have to pay for them again?

Would even be willing to pay the costs of the arsenal refinishing that many of them have. Even though as a taxpayer the armed forces received the guns I paid for in new condition.

Help me understand where I am wrong here
.

What do you know!
It would be really cool to get garands , M16s , 1911s free as "we" paid for them.
But then you would have to prove you where paying taxes when the weapons where bought it would not be fair giving a few garand to someone whos only been paying taxes a few years.
US Army just assume run them through Capt. Crunch. So far tbough only about 1million guns have been crushed... Well thats what they tell us.

 

[mac1911]

No disrespect intended, but there are very, very few of us alive that "paid" for Garands when they were last produced for the Govt. And even if we were, how much actually came out of my or your pocket? $1.32? 75 cents? Less? Do you think they should resell them back to the public at that price? OK, add in inflation, now we're up to $12.

Recent films and books about WWII have done more for Garand sales than anything, and the CMP made a marksmanship "want" for these rifles with their "Games" matches. However, the main purpose of the sales is to generate money to fund all CMP activities in perpetuity.

Marksmanship with the Garand via the "Games" matches is a small percentage of their activities in this area. The Junior programs have nothing to do with M1's. Neither do the Distinguished programs and the National Trophy Matches (other than the National "Games" matches being held in conjunction with them).

People may or may not participate in CMP marksmanship activities (I would encourage all to at least try it), but you can still buy firearms from them at a price point lower than the open market.

Just a tid bit.
I have put more rounds down range with my CMP surplus 10m Daisy 853 air rifle than all my Garands combined. Its the only practice I really get.

 

[mac1911]

And that's my problem with it. Selling inexpensive milsurps, say $100-500, is a gateway drug to shooting and gun ownership. Selling guns for retirees to fawn over and stuff in a safe doesn't create new shooters, except if maybe the gun gets shot by someone else.

My interest is in spreading the joy of getting people into old guns. Not in making guns into things like classic cars, something that rarely sees the light of day and costs a lot.

you should refocus, get people into marksmenship and shooting "games" not into old guns.
As cool as I think old guns are when I take new shooters out I,put something a bit more modern in thier hands.
As far as tbe cost goes.....almost everyone i have ever heard say. "I wish I could afford" usually can but they spend their money in other places.
Heck i can say $200 right of the rip on your next M1 purchase. PM if interested.

Also so many that say they "cant afford" usually do so holding a extra large DD coffee, scratch tickets jammed all over every crevis in thier cars. $1000 plus phones, $100 month phone bill, pre covid where at the bar weekly and on and on.

I can almost bet most people here throw away $1000 year on bullshit.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

you should refocus, get people into marksmenship and shooting "games" not into old guns.
As cool as I think old guns are when I take new shooters out I,put something a bit more modern in thier hands.
As far as tbe cost goes.....almost everyone i have ever heard say. "I wish I could afford" usually can but they spend their money in other places.
Heck i can say $200 right of the rip on your next M1 purchase. PM if interested.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't stick an old milsurp in the hands of someone who's never shot any gun before. But if someone's looking for an inexpensive gun and knows basic gun safety and shooting fundamentals, a milsurp is a nice way to have fun for a few hundred dollars.

Let me put it this way, my first gun of my own was a M91/30 that I bought when I was 18. I started shooting .22s at 6 and shotguns at 11. For me and a lot of people my age, a cheap Mosin with tons of surplus ammo was a great way to get into guns.

It also depends on the person. If I know someone appreciates history, an old gun is a piece of history.

 

[mac1911]

And that's my problem with it. Selling inexpensive milsurps, say $100-500, is a gateway drug to shooting and gun ownership. Selling guns for retirees to fawn over and stuff in a safe doesn't create new shooters, except if maybe the gun gets shot by someone else.

My interest is in spreading the joy of getting people into old guns. Not in making guns into things like classic cars, something that rarely sees the light of day and costs a lot.

the problem with cheap old guns is the lack of cheap ammo.
i bought my mosin only because I could get ammo for 12 cents per round shipped , all for range plinking

 

[Deleted member 67409]

the problem with cheap old guns is the lack of cheap ammo.
i bought my mosin only because I could get ammo for 12 cents per round shipped , all for range plinking

It depends. 7.62x39 is dirt cheap and there's the SKS. 8mm was cheap. The weird stuff like 6.5x50 Arisaka or 6.5 Carcano? No, not good.

 

[mac1911]

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't stick an old milsurp in the hands of someone who's never shot any gun before. But if someone's looking for an inexpensive gun and knows basic gun safety and shooting fundamentals, a milsurp is a nice way to have fun for a few hundred dollars.

Let me put it this way, my first gun of my own was a M91/30 that I bought when I was 18. I started shooting .22s at 6 and shotguns at 11. For me and a lot of people my age, a cheap Mosin with tons of surplus ammo was a great way to get into guns.

It also depends on the person. If I know someone appreciates history, an old gun is a piece of history.

theres (pre covid and election bs) plenty of inexpensive guns to be had for new shooters they dont have to be milsurps.
Sadly a large percent of gun owners buy some guns and toss them in the closet.
Another tid bit.
I have been able to bribe more folks here on NES to come shoot for free. From 22 rifles to M1 and other surplus. Than friends or family.
The return rate is somewhat low. About 25% are still active in shooting .
If your not participating at some level even at you local club shoots and fun matches eventually theres no one going .

Another "cant afford" well sometimes you need to find other ways to make money.
Today I cashed in tbe cans my wife and kids usually toss out. Between the 4 they are good for 5 redemable cans/bottles a day. About $100 a year.
Truck is packed with copper scrap for a run over before they close tomorrow another $200+ im sure.
Theres my new K98 barrel.!
Im also cleaning out my shed and selling everything I can actually get $ for. Been working out well.
Oh my friend just got into guns this year, license just before covid hit. Hes been getting ammo everyweek. He really wants a M1 and was wondering how to get the money. I told him sell that stupid watch you have hanging off your wrist.
He fades into that circle of people who think you need a $1000+ watch to tell time.

 

[mac1911]

It depends. 7.62x39 is dirt cheap and there's the SKS. 8mm was cheap. The weird stuff like 6.5x50 Arisaka or 6.5 Carcano? No, not good.

your not finding sks all that cheap these days. X39 has not been dirt cheap for years. The cheapest of center fire new production ammo yes. 8mm was cheap but most of the surplus 8mm sucked , hangfires,click no bang had some 80s yugo 8mm roll through that was really nice.
Also put a sks in most peoples hands and they wont like it.

 

[Mountain]

your not finding sks all that cheap these days. X39 has not been dirt cheap for years. The cheapest of center fire new production ammo yes. 8mm was cheap but most of the surplus 8mm sucked , hangfires,click no bang had some 80s yugo 8mm roll through that was really nice.
Also put a sks in most peoples hands and they wont like it.

I dunno. My brother's SKS would out-shoot my Colt H-bar. F'in thing was a lemon.

Pre Antifa/Boogaloo/Wu Flu times the number one dud round that would be dumped at the range I am chairman of was milsurp 8mm. All had primers that had been struck yet no boom. Haven't seen any lately but I do see a lot of 5.56. Those appear to be dropped accidentally or jammed and bent.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

theres (pre covid and election bs) plenty of inexpensive guns to be had for new shooters they dont have to be milsurps.
Sadly a large percent of gun owners buy some guns and toss them in the closet.
Another tid bit.
I have been able to bribe more folks here on NES to come shoot for free. From 22 rifles to M1 and other surplus. Than friends or family.
The return rate is somewhat low. About 25% are still active in shooting .
If your not participating at some level even at you local club shoots and fun matches eventually theres no one going .

Another "cant afford" well sometimes you need to find other ways to make money.
Today I cashed in tbe cans my wife and kids usually toss out. Between the 4 they are good for 5 redemable cans/bottles a day. About $100 a year.
Truck is packed with copper scrap for a run over before they close tomorrow another $200+ im sure.
Theres my new K98 barrel.!
Im also cleaning out my shed and selling everything I can actually get $ for. Been working out well.
Oh my friend just got into guns this year, license just before covid hit. Hes been getting ammo everyweek. He really wants a M1 and was wondering how to get the money. I told him sell that stupid watch you have hanging off your wrist.
He fades into that circle of people who think you need a $1000+ watch to tell time.

The problem of people not coming back to the range to shoot is beyond this thread - but yeah, a ton of people just own a few guns and never do anything with them.

All of my friends enjoy shooting or hunting, probably because I meet all my friends when talking guns

There are 2-gun matches with old guns in mind, such as what Ian and Karl of InRange TV do. I'd like to get such matches together here in New England once clubs get less COVID-weary. Even shooting 7.62 NATO battle rifles in action shooting is a very humbling experience in comparison to 5.56 race guns. But it teaches quite a lot.

 

[mac1911]

The problem of people not coming back to the range to shoot is beyond this thread - but yeah, a ton of people just own a few guns and never do anything with them.

All of my friends enjoy shooting or hunting, probably because I meet all my friends when talking guns

There are 2-gun matches with old guns in mind, such as what Ian and Karl of InRange TV do. I'd like to get such matches together here in New England once clubs get less COVID-weary. Even shooting 7.62 NATO battle rifles in action shooting is a very humbling experience in comparison to 5.56 race guns. But it teaches quite a lot.

i wish the best for any matches/leagues you try to organize. i could not get 8-10 guys to agree to meet up for a 22lr F calss/ know your limits , PRS experimental match . Getting the clubs to give up a day for a match is work in ifself.
Oh and be ready to not to do much of any shooting if you are organizing and running a match.

 

[majspud]

We used to have a MilSurp shoot at my club before my heart attack. Kinda faded away...
t

 

[67ray]

Oh, I see now. You just want all surplus weapons to be given away free to all taxpayers who just ask for them. Gotcha.

P.S. the US Govt ISN'T selling them; they are donated to a separate entity for basic funding purposes. That separate entity (the CMP) arguably uses the sales to fund a program that benefits the country as a whole.

Don't like it? Go talk to your Senator and get it changed so you get one for free.

Sorry, but the shell organization that is the CMP would never hold up in Court as a separate entity prima facia. It is created, chartered and supplied with product from the government. So that argument is nonsense.

But, why you so short? You don't like returning value to taxpayers? Or are you personally benefiting from the CMP sales?
.

 

[mac1911]

We used to have a MilSurp shoot at my club before my heart attack. Kinda faded away...
t

Yup, one club I go to the cmp guys are all fading. Last sat it was me one of the old timers and another guy. The match director is thinking of cancelling cmp for jan/fed/march from 2 times month for 60 years to starting to cancell. It will fade.
Just like silhouette around here.

 

[Mountain]

Yup, one club I go to the cmp guys are all fading. Last sat it was me one of the old timers and another guy. The match director is thinking of cancelling cmp for jan/fed/march from 2 times month for 60 years to starting to cancell. It will fade.
Just like silhouette around here.

Everyone wants to be a John Wick poseur, so other shooting sports have lost the cool factor. On a positive note, OCSA CMP matches have grown and picked up a pretty good following. The Ames matches seem to have regular attendance as well.

 

[AHM]

But, why you so short? You don't like returning value to taxpayers? Or are you personally benefiting from the CMP sales?

Back in the day, the Feds had a law that when paying for computer time,
they had to receive the absolute cheapest rates. It was a crime to charge more.

Anyone who goes crying to some court that surplus guns are not being given away for free
is likely to awake some giant and fill it with the terrible purpose of ensuring that
no surplus gun is sold below the Intarweb average price.