mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 01:23:35 PM new
Well, I know you can't sell guns on ebay. What about a 57mm Anti Tank Cannon??? Auction number 4613865796
http://tinyurl.com/bb8fz
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is. 
|
stonecold613
|
posted on February 17, 2006 01:58:42 PM new
Makes you wonder about your manhood.
.
.
.
Many misleading tricks in 2006. The new Demomoron slogan.
|
irked
|
posted on February 17, 2006 02:12:42 PM new
Hummmm wonder about this one does it still fire? if you can't sell guns what make this different it would be more dangerous would it not?. It also has his email in the auction isn't that a big no no?
**************
Can't touch this! uh huh, uh huh.
"Por favor, no exprima el Charmin."
|
sparkz
|
posted on February 17, 2006 02:34:50 PM new
He added a statement that it is inert and not a firearm. I had to say the same thing when I listed a WW1 aerial bomb once.
If Murphy's law is correct, everything East of the San Andreas Fault will slide into the Atlantic
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 02:43:08 PM new
In my opinion this does not meet BATF regulations for rendering non fireable. He states in the listing that the breech and breech ring have been removed but sais the barrel is fine. Being a cannon the receiver is part of the barrel and the receiver is what has to be made non servicable or repairable. I own a trailer mounted 106mm Recoilless Rifle (RCLR) (physically about the same size as this) and to legally own it without a BATF registration tax stamp I had to have the breech end welded solid and the receiver drilled full of holes on the 50cal spotting rifle that is mounted on the top of it.
I called my local BATF branch office and asked them. The agent I spoke with also thought this did not meet regulations for proper demilling. He forwarded it to the technical department of the explosives division for further investigation.
Don't be supprised if this auction does a quick bye bye. If it is legal that's great, I may even bid on it. But I thought I better make sure this thing is legal first. I would rather have the Department of Justice and BATF agents knocking on his door and not mine.
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
|
DrArcane
|
posted on February 17, 2006 02:43:40 PM new
That'd make one truly unique lawn ornament.
Dr. Arcane, revelator of mystical secrets
http://www.drarcane.com
Got questions about the secrets of the universe?
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:02:16 PM new
I called my local BATF branch office and asked them.
I am curious did you even bother to contact the seller or just snitch first?
That's ok if you didn't I did to let him know of this thread.
Ron
[ edited by WashingtoneBayer on Feb 17, 2006 03:07 PM ]
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:15:29 PM new
Since he does not have stated in his listing that he has a DOJ BATF certificate of compliance for this the answer is no, I did not contact him. Since this is classified as a weapon of mass destruction the first thing I would have stated in the listing would be that it had the certification. It's simple, if you are going to deal in weapons like this you need to know the regulations that cover them and disclose such regulations in the description. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
|
cblev65252
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:21:10 PM new
Mike - I think you did the right thing.
Cheryl
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:25:24 PM new
So you feel that helping a fellow seller with some information wouldn't have been the better choice?
Cheryl I am surprised as much as you complain about other sellers getting your auctions shut down.
Ron
|
Bear1949
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:29:36 PM new
Simple answer is in his listing:
There is no breech ring or breech. This is inert and not a firearm.
Without a breech and breech ring a round cannot be chambered, thus making it a demilled weapon.
Since this is classified as a weapon of mass destruction
Wrong. If functional it would be classified under BATF regulations as a "destructive device".
It is no different that the cannons listed here.
http://www.sarcoinc.com/ootw-3.html
It is perfectly legal to sell and own without any type of government certificates.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
|
fluffythewondercat
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:31:07 PM new
Um. I don't know. The fact that he listed it the way he did... 1945 International Harvester 57mm... makes me think he was trying to get around the firearms restriction, despite his disclaimer.
I don't know about you, but "cannon" is not the first thing that comes to mind when I see the words International Harvester.
fLufF
--
|
cblev65252
|
posted on February 17, 2006 03:48:57 PM new
"cannon" is not the first thing that comes to mind when I see the words International Harvester.
Me either. My stepfather used to sell Int'l Harvester trucks (passenger kind) back in the 1970's. Are they still selling those? I hated them back then.
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 04:24:04 PM new
Bear1949 - There is a difference between the one on ebay and the ones in the link you provided. The ones in the link you provided have had the breach mounting area tourched as to make it non repairable. The breech portion on the one listed in ebay is still repairable from the looks of it, and the seller does not state that it was tourched. Some simple machine shop work to fabricate some parts and it would be up and running in under a day.
I do however stand corrected on my terminoligy. You are correct that it is clasified a destructive device and not a wmd. Got the damn wmd's still on the mind from governments big screw up in Iraq.
fLuff - Just what I thought. What a strange place to list a cannon in, the military vehicle category. Makes you wonder what his motives were from the start. The proper category would have been in the military collectibles area of ebay, not ebay motors.
cblev65252 - Nope, International (now Navistar) has not sold small passanger vehicles for decades. Only medium and heavy class trucks and road tractors.
Ron - "So you feel that helping a fellow seller with some information wouldn't have been the better choice?" In this one case no. Helping a seller out with some info is one thing and I do it quite often. Telling them that they may be selling a weapon like this that "might not" be legal would just give a person the chance to make it dissapear to avoid criminal prosecution. If you saw your neighbor selling land mines out of his garage what would you do? Ask him if he thought it was legal or not and give them a chance to dispose of them or just call the police?
I personally feel fine with what I did. I don't proclaim to be the expert and therefore will let the BATF contact him and make sure if this is legal or not. If it is, great for him and if it stay's under $5,500 I'll probably bid on it. If not they would have no one to blame but themselves for the consequences.
edited to add: Another interesting thing he has stated in the listing is that it came from South America. What's up with that, US surplus cannon from South America. So that tells me it was not bought from uncle sam at a surplus auction where the US military would have demilled it.
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
[ edited by mikes4x4andtruckrepair on Feb 17, 2006 04:32 PM ]
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 04:53:22 PM new
This is the location where there should be a large tourch cut out.
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
[ edited by mikes4x4andtruckrepair on Feb 17, 2006 04:55 PM ]
|
sparkz
|
posted on February 17, 2006 05:04:53 PM new
Mike...My thoughts exactly. The use of the word "inert" implies that it was rendered inoperable by the military, and as such, there would be a notice stamped in a conspicuous place on the body of the weapon. This will always pass BATF muster. 98% of the machine guns, mortars, artillery pieces etc used as props by the movie studios have these permanent impressions on the receivers. Only about 2% of those weapons are operative and covered by permits. Trying to render a weapon inoperative yourself can be tricky. And it doesn't mean removing key parts that can be replaced later. It involves an oxyacetelyne torch and extensive welding. This weapon was donated to some banana republic dictator in the 50's and recently found its way back to the U.S. It would be interesting to know the history of that weapon, including what the customs forms said when it came into this country.
If Murphy's law is correct, everything East of the San Andreas Fault will slide into the Atlantic
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 05:07:52 PM new
The seller just emailed me the following and asked if I would post it here since he is not a Vendio member.
Dear Sir,
I came accross your Vendio posting concerning my cannon. I would like to point out
that a cannon barrel on wheels is just that. It is unregulated by both state and
local laws. Only the breech ring is a regulated item, which is not included.. 40 of
these cannons were brought into the USA 10 years ago with the permission and full
knowledge of the US government. This is the 2nd inert cannon I have sold on ebay. I
suggest that you list your concerns on one of the following web sites, there are
many knowledgeable people who can give you a straight answer:
http://www.obscure-reference.com/cgi-bin/atr.cgi
http://subguns.com/boards/mgmsg.cgi
http://www.sturmgewehr.com/webBBS/semiforum.cgi
Also you may research DD (destructive devices) federal law here:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/nfa_faq.txt
I regret that I cannot post a reply on the Vendio web site unless I subscribe. I
would appreciate if you could list your findings for others to read once you have
made a conclusion on the matter.
Regards
Robert Nitsche
615-418-2073
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on February 17, 2006 05:37:48 PM new
I would give the neighbor the chance to dispose of them as that would be the neighborly thing to do.
I would only call the police as a very last resort if I felt it was a criminal activity.
Appears that the seller is aware of what he is doing and it will be interesting to see what the BATF has to say.
Ron
|
Bear1949
|
posted on February 17, 2006 05:41:37 PM new
cannon" is not the first thing that comes to mind when I see the words International Harvester.
International Harvester manufactured a variety of items fot the military during WWII. Including trucks (aka 6x6 or duce and a half), rifles and parts for those rifles, (M1 Garand, M1 Carbine), and much more.
Mike, without a picture of the breech end of the cannon, we can only speculate as to its condition. But I can assure you a weapon like that would not be in civilian hands were it fully functional.
To own a fully functional cannon, he would have had to apply & receive an exemption from the BATF for a destructive device (almost impossible to obtain), then pay a $200 transfer tax fee plus the actual purchase price for it. Same standard as purchasing a class III weapon.
The same demilling operation is still in use today in the importation of AK47, RPK, AKM, AMD, Sumi, MG34, MG42, Sten SMG and other parts kits from overseas. The receives must be flame cut into three pieces to render it inoperatable. Of all of the above only the AK47, RPK, AKM & AMD's can be made operable but only in semi auto mode by using a new semi auto receiver. The others do not have a semi auto receiver available and can only be made into "wall hangers" (dummy guns).
If you are that concerned about it why not send him a request for a photo verifying it has been demilled. All it would take is cutting off eight or ten inches to render it inoperable.The BATF does keep track of these things .
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
|
fluffythewondercat
|
posted on February 17, 2006 05:48:12 PM new
International Harvester manufactured a variety of items fot the military during WWII
I don't doubt it. Yet I still wonder why he listed it the way he did.
As you pointed out, IH made a variety of items, including rifles. Therefore the use of "International Harvester" is pretty vague as a descriptor, yes? And the fact the item appears in the Military Vehicles category seems...well, deceptive.
The question I have for Mr. Nitsche is this:
If you have already sold one of these cannons on eBay (and by so saying, implying that it's okay to do so), why did you not put the word "cannon" in the title?
You may reply directly to me: [email protected]
fLufF
--
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 17, 2006 05:48:28 PM new
Bear1949 - The above picture of the breech/receiver area is a direct link to his photo in the auction listing. That's what raised my eye brows. No tourching here that I can see.
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
|
Bear1949
|
posted on February 17, 2006 07:20:56 PM new
Item # 3 in diagram below is the breech.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
|
parklane64
|
posted on February 17, 2006 07:53:46 PM new
Mike, sorry to see that you're a POS snitch.
ETA: IMO
[ edited by parklane64 on Feb 17, 2006 07:55 PM ]
|
LtRay
|
posted on February 17, 2006 08:32:46 PM new
Park, I think that comment is out of line for this forum.
Mike raised a valid concern on this board. The item in question could be very dangerous if not properly rendered useless.
And I have to agree with Mike's action in checking with the proper authorities. Mike is not qualified to tell the seller that his item is non-compliant. And even if the seller were to tell me that the cannon had been properly disabled, that is hardly sufficient info to prove that it has been.
Mike did not report him to eBay, so I hardly think you could call him a snitch. He contacted the correct govenment bureau with a valid question.
There are basically 3 audiences for this item. Museums, collectors and private militias. The first two would have no need for a cannon that had NOT been disabled.
The third group would want a cannon that could be restored to use. And if you do not think such groups exist in our peace loving country, let me know and I'll give you directions to the next Great Klan meeting in Western Kentucky.
As for the example of field mines at yard sales. I am not qualified to determine if one is legal or not, but I would not have a problem calling my local sheriff's department to have them check it out.
I own guns. I even feel that weapon ownership is a right. But if someone is trying to bypass govenment regulations, I would red flag it in a heartbeat!
[ edited by LtRay on Feb 17, 2006 08:35 PM ]
|
sparkz
|
posted on February 17, 2006 09:14:09 PM new
There are several things about this auction that could be improved upon. First, he put in the staement that the piece was inert as an afterthought addition to the description, and he uses mediocre quality images that are rendered worthless by the compression of Ebay's cheesy image hosting system. Both very unprofessional IMO. And if he had just gone to the trouble to have it inspected by BATF and obtained a note on their letterhead that it was a legal item and not subject to their regulations and posted a scan of that note in the auction, he would probably have twice as many bids as he has now, mainly from people who are now reluctant to bid because of their uncertainty about its legality.
If Murphy's law is correct, everything East of the San Andreas Fault will slide into the Atlantic
|
cblev65252
|
posted on February 18, 2006 04:33:39 AM new
Cheryl I am surprised as much as you complain about other sellers getting your auctions shut down.
Ron there is a big difference between a competitor wanting to eliminate his/her competition by reporting an item to eBay for non-existence infractions and selling a cannon on eBay that could potentially fall into the wrong hands. What, do you think one way on the RT and another on EO? Over there, you would have called this a WOMD and would have been discussing how it is probably being bought by a Muslim.
parklane
Mike, sorry to see that you're a POS snitch.
I post very rarely on the RT because of comments such as yours. LtRay is correct in saying that that comment is out of line for this forum.
Mike
Let us know what you find out.
Cheryl
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
[ edited by cblev65252 on Feb 18, 2006 04:34 AM ]
|
mikes4x4andtruckrepair
|
posted on February 18, 2006 06:56:00 AM new
fLuff - Actually, International Harvester did make many guns and weapons systems for the government over the years. During WWII many of the auto and truck manufacturers transformed their production lines into weapons manufacturing production lines.
parklane64 - That's your opinion and living in a free country have every right to voice your opinion. Say what you will, I've got thick skin. I know what I did was right. I served my country for 8 years in active Army and am also a proud legal owner of numerous guns (some would probably say to many). I did not report the cannon to ebay because they would have no idea what they are looking at. I reported it to the proper government authority that could investigate the matter properly and verify it's legality. So the answer to your statement would be, yes, I am a POS snitch.
LtRay - "I own guns. I even feel that weapon ownership is a right. But if someone is trying to bypass govenment regulations, I would red flag it in a heartbeat!" DITTO
They say your memory's the second thing to go, I just can't remember what the first thing is.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on February 18, 2006 09:42:15 AM new
Sure Cheryl that item is easily concealed and moved.
Bear thanks for the info. I wish people would become more educated before going off on a knee jerk reaction.
It is funny that some of these same people have a fit when their auctions are reported but seem to think it is ok to screw with someone else's.
Freedom and Liberty are just words in a book to these people.
Ron
[ edited by WashingtoneBayer on Feb 18, 2006 09:42 AM ]
|
Bear1949
|
posted on February 18, 2006 10:07:58 AM new
Ron, it is easy to see why people who don't have knowledge of a particular subject are easily swayed by misleading info.
It is also easy to see from the auctions photos that the cannon did not have the breech & breech ring installed.
For those still wondering what the breech does, the breech is the portion of the cannon mechanism that locks the cannon shell into the chamber. It also contains the firing mechanism.
The BATF regs state the breech must either be removed (like in this case) or flame cut in half.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
|
cblev65252
|
posted on February 18, 2006 11:32:18 AM new
Ron
Pardon me, but this is NOT the RT. No one reported the auction to eBay. It was reported to a government agency for clarification.
Bear
Can't the breech just be replaced making this cannon fireable? Just curious.
Cheryl
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
