Post by: ShrinkMD on October 23, 2007, 07:06:36 PM
I've seen Oleg (or was it someone else's?) poster saying something like "from oppressing slaves into free american hands" or something like that, and I know it's just an inanimate object, but lots of people didn't want to buy Japanese cars or German products for a long time after WWII. I know its mine, now, and serves me, but I never quite appreciated Russian history from the "time of the Mosin" and it isn't pretty at all.
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 24, 2007, 05:50:20 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on October 24, 2007, 05:54:08 AM
The Party officers didn't carry Mosins, the conscripts, who were often just farmboys and girls...did. They were just fighting to protect their home.
Most pogrom executions were done to a kneeling prisoner with a Nagant revolver to the head.
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 24, 2007, 08:22:51 AM
More on the topic, I have been reading some nice books on riflemen and snipers more recently. I specifically recommend Herbert McBride's books as well as "Sniper on the Eastern Front" by Albrecht Wacker (I know, what are the chances for such a name!). Curiously, the German sniper in the latter book used a captured Mosin with a Russian scope for the better part of his career. Also, it appears the Russians were much better supplied with snipers than the Germans were, at least in WW2.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 24, 2007, 08:41:01 AM
Post by: Euclidean on October 24, 2007, 08:59:10 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on October 24, 2007, 09:06:52 AM
I've often marveled at my M44 and the surplus web gear it came with, and considered briefly what it must have been like being the son of a mud farmer humping that thing or something very similar to it around Eastern Europe going through all sorts of hell. It's not a warm fuzzy feeling at all. But human history isn't all about the good parts we can be proud of.
If it was even theirs...a lot of conscripts got their rifle picking it up off the body of a fallen comrade. And if issued ammo, they were only given a few rounds...those two pouches? That's it! After that, the bayonet was their weapon.
As for pistols, I wonder what my 1946 Soviet TT-33 has seen. It's in nice shape, but the CCCP grips do have a bit of wear from hands.
Post by: Euclidean on October 24, 2007, 09:10:50 AM
Post by: ShrinkMD on October 24, 2007, 07:10:22 PM
After reading this book I am reconsidering getting a K98. At first I wasn't going to, but given Russian history it seems a toss up over which to boycott. I guess in the end they serve us now. The Israelis weren't shy about using whatever they could get their hands on in 1948, and that was a lot closer in time to those events. I guess they just are tools in the end, and any sentiments or thoughts about them don't need Mpro7 to remove.
It is still weird seeing all those Mosins in the book's pictures, and wondering if any are now in someone's safe here.
Post by: French G. on October 24, 2007, 07:57:03 PM
I owned a Mosin, Mak, and CZ-52 at one point. I admired their designs for the typical combloc points of rugged, functional, simple in design and peasant proof. I never thought one way or the other about their history. While I admire the AK design, I grew up seeing that distinctive profile in the hands of peace activists like Arafat. For me, I pass on the AK. No real logic, just what I feel.
I do have a nice guilt free collection now. 1911s, new Glocks, M-1a, M-1 on the way and 4 K-31s. I figure if a mil-surp is going to be guilt free a Garand and a K-31 are pretty close.
Post by: K Frame on October 24, 2007, 09:07:59 PM
One of the things covered was the Cossak massacre of civilians in Odessa.
Post by: ShrinkMD on October 25, 2007, 02:56:16 AM
Quote
I figure if a mil-surp is going to be guilt free a Garand and a K-31 are pretty close.
I was thinking that, too. Although the Swiss were guilty of helping the Nazis get all their gold out of Europe to South America at the end of the war (with the Vatican's help, as well as the CIA and the Brits) since they suddenly got very interested in thwarting the USSR from taking over whatever was left of Post War Europe. They didn't put anyone in ovens or massacre their own people by the city-load, though.
The garand seems like the best choice. Any thoughts on Garand Guy vs. CMP? Shiny and new does seem nice.
Post by: Manedwolf on October 25, 2007, 04:03:37 AM
They blame the guns, not the people who misuse them. The gun is just a tool, like a shovel or a baseball bat, both of which can and have been used to kill.
It's a gun. It's an inert object, not a good or evil totem. While I wonder where some of mine have been, and wonder whose hands might have worn down a grip or carved initials into a stock, I wonder the same about any historic artifact that shows a lot of human use through wear from hands. I don't pretend that they have any personality or influence of their own.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 25, 2007, 04:57:02 AM
Quote
I find that anthropomorphizing a bit of metal and wood as if it carries the thoughts and intents and personality of the people who may have made or misused it is not only rather silly, but precisely what the antis do.
I find keeping such items in my home to be the same as memorializing the deeds done with them. Memorializing murderers and oppressors is not only rather creepy, but is precisely what Nazi and Soviet apologists do.
Post by: Manedwolf on October 25, 2007, 05:07:45 AM
Quote
I find that anthropomorphizing a bit of metal and wood as if it carries the thoughts and intents and personality of the people who may have made or misused it is not only rather silly, but precisely what the antis do.
I find keeping such items in my home to be the same as memorializing the deeds done with them. Memorializing murderers and oppressors is not only rather creepy, but is precisely what Nazi and Soviet apologists do.
You personally know that a given gun was used in a murder, when millions of that model were made? Wow, that's some talent.
As I said, you're doing precisely what the Bradyites do...blame the gun, not the person.
And good job, Joe! You just said that everyone here who collects Mausers, Lugers, Mosins and Tokarevs is a Nazi or Soviet apologist. Win friends and influence people, indeed.
Post by: Euclidean on October 25, 2007, 09:56:33 AM
I find keeping such items in my home to be the same as memorializing the deeds done with them. Memorializing murderers and oppressors is not only rather creepy, but is precisely what Nazi and Soviet apologists do.
Joe Demko, we do ourselves a great disservice when we try to scour our memory of bad things that have happened. Remembering what has happened in the past is not the same as celebrating or glorifying it. If we forget what has happened, we cannot learn from it, and if we do not learn from it, we are doomed to repeat it.
On a small scale, I wish sometimes I could forget about the way my father died almost two years ago. But really, would I be well served going day to day deluding myself that he never died and was still alive? No, that wouldn't be healthy at all.
On a larger scale, what about something like the Holocaust or the 9/11 terror attacks? Shouldn't we destroy all records of these horrible events because they are so upsetting? Isn't it better to just quietly say "Okay it happened" and then never talk about it again? No, because that wouldn't be healthy either.
We have an obligation to the future to remember the bleak and black spots of human history. When masses of people privately own relics like Mosin Nagant rifles or Nazi marked weapons, it preserves that memory.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 25, 2007, 10:33:39 AM
Post by: Joe Demko on October 25, 2007, 11:48:21 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on October 25, 2007, 11:50:44 AM
BTW, manedwolf, my posts seem to keep you in a constant 3 foot hover. Why don't you do yourself a favor and skip them? I'm not going to change just to suit you, so why not make better use of your time than reading something you know is going to irritate you? I promise it won't mar my enjoyment of the board to know you aren't reading my posts.
You're the one denigrating people who choose to collect such things with a good dose of holier-than-thou about the issue.
Post by: Euclidean on October 25, 2007, 12:05:52 PM
Who said anything about forgetting these crimes against humanity? Please, if I did so, feel free to quote me. In fact, I demand that you do so.
K I can do that. Here you go.
I find keeping such items in my home to be the same as memorializing the deeds done with them. Memorializing murderers and oppressors is not only rather creepy, but is precisely what Nazi and Soviet apologists do.
To not want to memorialize such events by preserving physical evidence of their occurrence is to want to forget them, is it not?
Not wanting to have souveniers of atrocities is not the same thing as saying they should be forgotten.
But it is. When you oppose or even criticize the preservation of these artifacts of the past and their widespread keeping, you are in some small way contributing to the inevitable loss of information about these events. Furthermore, your contention that keeping these artifacts is somehow "bad" is an inaccurate statement which I feel needs to be corrected in the same venue in which it was offered.
I respect your right to not own things you do not want, but your feelings on the matter are irrational and your statements imply that people who feel differently are in the wrong somehow. If that is not the case, clarify.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 25, 2007, 12:08:54 PM
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 25, 2007, 12:29:01 PM
Post by: Euclidean on October 25, 2007, 12:43:40 PM
Please. If you want to keep Stalinist-era weapons because you like shooting them or because they are cheap, keep them. It is disingenuous, at best, to claim that without US shooters keeping M-44's and MN revolvers the atrocities of the Soviet system will be forgotten.
Perhaps.
But it sure doesn't hurt that there's evidence of these deeds in the hands of people who can learn from that history. In fact, it was just seeing a Mosin Nagant for the first time which inspired me to learn something about these weapons and the history associated with them.
I've had people see my M44 and ask about it, and I've told them about some of the things I've learned. That further cements these events into the memory of our species.
Without the proliferation of these surplus rifles, this never would have happened. And just think if anybody ever tries to deny these events, several thousand if not million MN owners are going to have concrete evidence those people are full of it.
In fact in this age of Socialists I think it's more important than ever we understand Stalin's era.
If that's being disingenuous, then I'll continue being disingenuous. Some people are kinesthetic learners, and if spreading this history to such people is something you're against, we'll just have to disagree.
Post by: Balog on October 25, 2007, 02:10:24 PM
I can't think of a better F you to the monsters that slaughtered innocents than using their own weapons to defend against that ever happening again. Also, how do you feel about the Mosins captured and re-done by the Finns. Is just the original Russian receiver evil, or is the whole thing tainted by the nasty spirits living in the metal?Secondly....
Quote
Also, it appears the Russians were much better supplied with snipers than the Germans were, at least in WW2.
Is true only if you have a very loose definition of sniper.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 25, 2007, 03:29:05 PM
Quote
But it sure doesn't hurt that there's evidence of these deeds in the hands of people who can learn from that history. In fact, it was just seeing a Mosin Nagant for the first time which inspired me to learn something about these weapons and the history associated with them.
Wasn't it someone from your side of this debate who stated that these old weapons are merely inanimate objects? If that is the case, then I don't see why their physical presence makes it any easier for us to remember those killed by the Bolsheviks and Stalinists. I remember that quite well, thank you, without mementos of the killers in my house. If, as has been claimed, it's just an inanimate hunk of wood and metal with no memory, and you have no idea what it was used for...then how is it that we will forget what happened without it?
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 25, 2007, 05:12:29 PM
I remember that quite well, thank you, without mementos of the killers in my house.
Joe, if you remember quite well without them, then their presence should not bother you any extra. I think you worked yourself into a contradiction.
Post by: Perd Hapley on October 25, 2007, 07:56:15 PM
Post by: roo_ster on October 26, 2007, 02:31:31 AM
As for his reasons (the slaughter of his ancestors by Stalin's murderers & the terror famine*), that is good a reason as any.
Probing & dissecting his antipathy toward them is bound to come up with a logical inconsistency, since the antipathy is based emotion rather than logic. Some personal decisions are like that.
As long as he doesn't try to restrict the rest of us from purchasing, I do not care. I can even soldier on if he thinks my owning of a Mosin is sympathy for the commies or whatnot. I am notoriously insensitive to the opinions of nearly all humanity, so generating a bit of apathy toward that particular opinion of Joe's is no great feat on my part.
FWIW, I own a Mosin M44 and will purchase more in the future. I'd particularly like a Finn.
* May Walter Duranty burn in Hell with Stalin
Post by: Joe Demko on October 26, 2007, 04:54:02 AM
I remember that quite well, thank you, without mementos of the killers in my house.
Joe, if you remember quite well without them, then their presence should not bother you any extra. I think you worked yourself into a contradiction.
No contradiction. It also won't bother me any less. Is there some reason I must have relics of murderers in my house? Those of you who are, seemingly, so concerned that Bolshevik/Stalinist/Soviet atrocities will be forgotten could preserve relics of those who were killed, could you not? Do you?
BTW, a clarification is in order.
This post from me:
Quote
I find keeping such items in my home to be the same as memorializing the deeds done with them. Memorializing murderers and oppressors is not only rather creepy, but is precisely what Nazi and Soviet apologists do.
Was a sarcastic reply to this post:
Quote
I find that anthropomorphizing a bit of metal and wood as if it carries the thoughts and intents and personality of the people who may have made or misused it is not only rather silly, but precisely what the antis do.
I should have included an
to make the sarcasm clearer. Post by: CAnnoneer on October 26, 2007, 08:49:55 AM
Whether any particular rifle was or not is hardly material in the here and now. I suspect Manedwolf and others see their Mosins as the tools of Russian peasants defending their country from Nazi invaders. Now you come and crap all over that, bringing up the alternative theory that their baby may have been used by NKVD. I don't see what this negativity accomplishes other than aggravate everybody.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 26, 2007, 09:02:23 AM
Post by: CAnnoneer on October 26, 2007, 09:11:56 AM
I think you are willfully ignoring the larger part of the history you claim to be preserving.
I simply see the glass half full.
Post by: Joe Demko on October 26, 2007, 11:35:08 AM
I think you are willfully ignoring the larger part of the history you claim to be preserving.
I simply see the glass half full.
Okay.