MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > Post-war Military Vehicles

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 29-01-12, 03:51
RHClarke's Avatar
RHClarke RHClarke is offline
Mr. HUP
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ottawa Area
Posts: 2,327
Default A Different Perspective

Do you think that the feelings of a few (and we are a rare lot in Canada) restorers outweighs the consequences of annoying our economically and militarily stronger neighbour, who by legislation (theirs mostly) owns the distribution and end user rights for the kit that is being destroyed? Hypothetically, the cost of not destroying them properly could be measured in sanctions that could affect our economy.

Yes, it is a shame that individuals are not permitted to play with these surplus armoured vehicles. However, our military heritage is being preserved through the Canadian War Museum. Hopefully they can squeeze a few more armoured and other vehicles into the bunker as they reach the end of their life cycles.

Now if you really want to pick a battle, do some research on the tendering process that led to the APCs being trucked all the way out to the west coast. That will probably be worth some ire.
__________________
RHC
Why is it that when you have the $$, you don't have the time, and when you have the time you don't have the $$?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 29-01-12, 04:56
chris vickery's Avatar
chris vickery chris vickery is offline
3RD ECHELON WKSP
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nipissing Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RHClarke View Post
Yes, it is a shame that individuals are not permitted to play with these surplus armoured vehicles. However, our military heritage is being preserved through the Canadian War Museum.
Rob, I hear what you are saying but as per your quote above, it kinda sounds reminescent of the Liberal gun control initiatives does it not????
Maybe if the CWM is in charge of preserving all our military heritage, then private citizens and restorers should also be licensed or revoked of our rights to be in possession of ex-military vehicles and equipment...

Food for thought.
__________________
3RD Echelon Wksp

1968 M274A5 Mule Baifield USMC
1966 M274A2 Mule BMY USMC
1966 M274A2 Mule BMY USMC
1958 M274 Mule Willys US Army
1970 M38A1 CDN3 70-08715 1 CSR
1943 Converto Airborne Trailer
1983 M1009 CUCV
1957 Triumph TRW 500cc

RT-524, PRC-77s,
and trucks and stuff and more stuff and and.......

OMVA, MVPA, G503, Steel Soldiers
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-01-12, 00:16
RHClarke's Avatar
RHClarke RHClarke is offline
Mr. HUP
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ottawa Area
Posts: 2,327
Default I'm With You!

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris vickery View Post
Rob, I hear what you are saying but as per your quote above, it kinda sounds reminescent of the Liberal gun control initiatives does it not???? Maybe if the CWM is in charge of preserving all our military heritage, then private citizens and restorers should also be licensed or revoked of our rights to be in possession of ex-military vehicles and equipment...

Food for thought.
Chris,

The only difference being that the gun control horseshit was a self inflicted wound. The ITAR issue is something we cannot control. We can get rid of part of the gun control problem (and I still hold hope that Mr. Harper and company will follow thru), but there is no way we can get rid of the terms and conditions of the US legislation if we continue to by US military kit.

Your suggestion to license collectors makes me shudder...let's not give the policy wonks here in Ottawa any ideas (PS, I now work in that policy world...).
__________________
RHC
Why is it that when you have the $$, you don't have the time, and when you have the time you don't have the $$?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 30-01-12, 01:05
chris vickery's Avatar
chris vickery chris vickery is offline
3RD ECHELON WKSP
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nipissing Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,969
Default

Rob, it was not my intention to suggest that we license collectors; rather it was YOUR wordage with regards to the CWM being Guardians of OUR History...
__________________
3RD Echelon Wksp

1968 M274A5 Mule Baifield USMC
1966 M274A2 Mule BMY USMC
1966 M274A2 Mule BMY USMC
1958 M274 Mule Willys US Army
1970 M38A1 CDN3 70-08715 1 CSR
1943 Converto Airborne Trailer
1983 M1009 CUCV
1957 Triumph TRW 500cc

RT-524, PRC-77s,
and trucks and stuff and more stuff and and.......

OMVA, MVPA, G503, Steel Soldiers
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 30-01-12, 01:49
RHClarke's Avatar
RHClarke RHClarke is offline
Mr. HUP
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ottawa Area
Posts: 2,327
Default Just Saying

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris vickery View Post
Rob, it was not my intention to suggest that we license collectors; rather it was YOUR wordage with regards to the CWM being Guardians of OUR History...
From a governmental due diligence point of view, yup! That is what the CWM is supposed to do. If you look at it from a black and white point of view, if the CWM has one of whatever we used in the military in the museum, that does the trick.

I too get emotional over inanimate objects and believe that we should be able to live in a "free" environment, but sometimes one gets organic stuff all over one's rose coloured glasses.

In this case, the world's most powerful nation is calling the shots, and we as ordinary Canucks have no recourse. Perhaps if a former government of Canada had played by the rules in the past, we wouldn't be in this pickle.

BTW, having logged more miles in M113s than I wish to remember, I won't miss them. Others will, but lamenting the effects of iron-clad legislation will only result in making the Guinness dissappear faster.

Alternatives? Howsabout a nice Brit 432? They almost smell the same on the inside...
__________________
RHC
Why is it that when you have the $$, you don't have the time, and when you have the time you don't have the $$?

Last edited by RHClarke; 30-01-12 at 01:55. Reason: mong spelin
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 30-01-12, 02:12
Gordon Yeo Gordon Yeo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Clinton Ontario
Posts: 414
Default

Rob has a good point, the U.K. and Europe are awash in surplus military equipment that can be had by throwing money at it. If people really want armour they could buy some and we wouldn't have to listen this constant angst about what we can't have.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 30-01-12, 02:47
chris vickery's Avatar
chris vickery chris vickery is offline
3RD ECHELON WKSP
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nipissing Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,969
Default

OK, so we agree to move on... Has the collector community at large come to realise that what mvs we do have in private hands are now going up in value?
Case in point; over the years the collector market has had a constant influx of vehs to satisfy our hunger. Take any WW2 milsurp right up to the Iltis. It seems now that many of the "less desirable" mvs will surely find fashion once guys wake up and find that getting into the hobby will be increasingly more difficult. I would hazard a guess to say it is just a matter of time before the bureaucrats decide to tighten things up with regard to imports....
__________________
3RD Echelon Wksp

1968 M274A5 Mule Baifield USMC
1966 M274A2 Mule BMY USMC
1966 M274A2 Mule BMY USMC
1958 M274 Mule Willys US Army
1970 M38A1 CDN3 70-08715 1 CSR
1943 Converto Airborne Trailer
1983 M1009 CUCV
1957 Triumph TRW 500cc

RT-524, PRC-77s,
and trucks and stuff and more stuff and and.......

OMVA, MVPA, G503, Steel Soldiers
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:35.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016