Surplus Ammo sales

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,741
    Lol that’s insane. Different times I guess
    I mean it was for SURE the war to end all wars this time. For sure. Pinky swear. We didn't need all that stuff just sitting around taking up space, armory maintenance, etc.

    One bit of seriousness, a LOT of the stuff dumped/destroyed was at the point of obsolescence. The Johnson for instance was nice and had some perks over the Garand, but the Garand was generally a fairly superior rifle and using just ONE rifle is the best way to go for logistics. Not immediately at war means we could take the slow approach and figure out what makes sense to keep or jettison. Most WWII planes at the end of the war, the writing was on the wall about Jets, so especially earlier models would have been destroyed anyway.

    But yes, it would be nice if the military took more time and thought to taxpayer value and what can and should be sold on the civilian market later (anything legal IMHO).
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,186
    Anne Arundel County
    I mean it was for SURE the war to end all wars this time. For sure. Pinky swear. We didn't need all that stuff just sitting around taking up space, armory maintenance, etc.

    One bit of seriousness, a LOT of the stuff dumped/destroyed was at the point of obsolescence. The Johnson for instance was nice and had some perks over the Garand, but the Garand was generally a fairly superior rifle and using just ONE rifle is the best way to go for logistics. Not immediately at war means we could take the slow approach and figure out what makes sense to keep or jettison. Most WWII planes at the end of the war, the writing was on the wall about Jets, so especially earlier models would have been destroyed anyway.

    But yes, it would be nice if the military took more time and thought to taxpayer value and what can and should be sold on the civilian market later (anything legal IMHO).
    Some of the decision to destroy war stocks after WWII was purposeful to prevent harm to domestic industry. After WWI, stocks of material like airplane engines were sold off cheap in great volume, and hindered investment in development of better-performing engines commercially for a decade.

    The lesson was taken into account in the decision to destroy rather than sell large stocks of land, sea, and air vehicles after WWII. Some got sold, but sales were throttled so as not to flood the market with war surplus that was in direct competition with commercial new products. Flooding the market and suppressing the commercial economy would have throw the country into deep recession just as the Government was trying to pay off war debt.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,603
    Messages
    7,288,068
    Members
    33,487
    Latest member
    Mikeymike88

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom