**IMPORTANT** If act S1416 passes ALL US WARBIRDS WILL BE DESTROYED

[Hajo]

Bodhi is correct unfortunately.  As in the past, legislation leaves a large window of translation.  What is stated in that bill can be taken in various ways.

The problem is in translation, or whatever one "thinks" it means.  So for instance, if a Govt. Official tells Bob Hoover his P-51 and P-38 must be destroyed, or the EAA is told their restored aircraft must be submitted to the US Govt. they've no choice in the matter.  As always our legislation is structured to the benefit of Attorneys so litigation can be brought forth and money made from this litigation or differences in "what this law means".  I love the US. but we continually build this damned bureaucracy by Lawyers elected to public office whom construct this legislation so that apparently the brotherhood of Attorneys can make a fee from litigation in it's translation in the lower courts.  Contact your Congressman by all means.

[Ripsnort]

Bet you can trace this back to the anti-gun group somehow, some way..

[Sky Viper]

Originally posted by Toad:
Bodhi is right on this one.

They de-mil machine guns by melting them down into a little puddle.

Not always...they may cut out the back end of barrels, and remove internal structures so that they cannot be restored to firing condition and yet maintain appearance.
This has been done many times.

I think it is important to understand the limits of this bills efforts.
I don't see anything in the writings referred to here that indicates a P51 will be crushed, or an M1 Carbine melted down, or a GI Survival knife melted down.

I'm with ya's on making sure that limiting the "DeMil" activity is not to include total destruction.
We obviously need to preserve history in order to understand it!

Viper

[Sky Viper]

(e) ESTABLISHMENT OF DEMILITARIZATION STANDARDS- (1) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations regarding the demilitarization of military equipment.

(2) The regulations shall be designed to ensure that--

(A) the equipment, after demilitarization, does not constitute a significant risk to public safety and does not have--

(i) a significant capability for use as a weapon; or

(ii) a uniquely military capability; and

(B) any person from whom private property is taken for public use under this section receives just compensation for the taking of the property.

(3) The regulations shall, at a minimum, define--

(A) the classes of significant military equipment requiring demilitarization before disposal; and

(B) what constitutes demilitarization for each class of significant military equipment.

(f) DEFINITION OF SIGNIFICANT MILITARY EQUIPMENT- In this section, the term `significant military equipment' means equipment that has a capability described in clause (i) or (ii) of subsection (e)(2) and--

Bohdi stated that the supposed destruction will be at the owner's cost...WRONG...read it!

Also, as indicated above, the SPECIFIC instruction is to ensure
 

...does not constitute a significant risk to public safety and does not have--

(i) a significant capability for use as a weapon; or

(ii) a uniquely military capability;

------------------------
The "uniquely military capability" means that it serves no other purpose than miltary action. (Does not include historical value)
In other words, if it is normal to our society, then it is ok.  Example: a P51 with no guns and no bomb release ability is just like a Piper Cub. It's only risk to public safety is in that it can crash. That is not "uniquely military."


You guys in the collection business need to stop and read.

Viper

[ 10-03-2001: Message edited by: Sky Viper ]

[sourkraut]

Head for the hills!! Lock up the women and children! Stock up on the food and water! Are you really an American?

C'mon guys, chill. Don't you know that we have a redneck in the Oval Office? All he wants to do is spy on us a little more  

[hazed-]

kinda makes you glad you aint american  

we got people driving pink tanks and with harrier jump jets mounted on their house!  

lets face it if you gonna get real paranoid you could call an airliner a military weapon now.Its been used as one.

I cant see anyone allowing a p51 or other warbird to be crushed because the government says it constitutes a military weapon and presents a danger to the public.They would have to crush every gun/aircraft/vehicle in America.Simply wont happen.

The only real threat this poses as far as i can see is to the future of ex-war planes.A present day aircraft that has just been decommissioned would constitute a threat even without guns.Would this mean they are no longer going to be sold on to private buyers?
Does this spell the end of airshows in 10 to 20 years when we will be wanting to see f16s,f14s etc flying around? will your government destroy them on decomission?

[Sharky]

I've seen this topic come up in some other places and the poster always states that the equipment will be siezed and destroyed without compensation to the owner.  However after having read the bill it is clear that is not the case yet many are still screaming that it is.

Bodhi, Prior to posting did you read the bill in question?  Or was your post a response to what someone had told you it contained?  Have your friends in the Warbird busness read the bill?  I'm not trying to pick a fight, but I just don't know how after reading the bill people still come to the conclusion that all restored Warbirds will be destroyed.

Now several people have said the problem is that the law (as unfortunatly most of our laws are) is up to interpetation.  Surely there has to be some lawyers in the community here that could shed some light on this from a legal stand point.

While I agree with Bodhi, that people interested in seeing our history perserved, should contact their Senators and Congressmen.  However I would ask that when you do, you voice what your concerns are with the bill (ie I don't want to see all our restored Warbirds destroyed) and get their opinion of what the intent of the bill actually is.  Then decide weather to right in support or opposition of the bill.

My personal understanding of the intent of this bill is, that there is currently a large amount of ex-soviet military hardware available to anyone with the cash to purchase it.  Some of this hardware could present a significant threat to the civil population and as such must be rendered unable to do so.

I beleive that you can currently purchase some fairly sophisticated aircraft of the ex-soviet union.  I know some of their Migs and other jet fighter/attack aircraft are available.  And I'm sure that other weapons are also.  I believe these are the target of this bill.

Anyway thats my take on the whole thing.  I could be wrong and Bodhi could be 100% right.  I think we need to know more about it before jumping to any conclusions though.

Sharky

[Bodhi]

Sharky,

This bill does nothing to combat foreign produced military equipment.  It only targets US equipment.  Mark my words, this bill passes, and Warbirds Flying will be a thing of the past.  This section of the bill is no longer up in it's entirety, it, was originally the equivalent of 10 pages long where it specifically dealt with a lot of things and DID state no compensation and at the owners expense.  If you people think this is  not worth your time, fine, but the Gov't's idea of Demilling equpiment is to drop a 30 ton blade through the sfuselage and wings, melt down the engines and weapons, and scrap the rest.  

Fight, it now, as it is a worthless additive that does nothing but constrict our rights as citizens.

[-tronski-]

Old news..wouldn't worry bout it..

 Tronsky

[Sky Viper]

Originally posted by Bodhi:
Sharky,

...but the Gov't's idea of Demilling equpiment is to drop a 30 ton blade through the sfuselage and wings, melt down the engines and weapons, and scrap the rest.  

Now I am sure you are rocking your chair harder than you should.

There is no 30 ton blade. When things are demiltarized, the are done by hand in a pains taking process.
During my time in the U.S. Navy, I helped ferry 2 Aircraft to a facility where they were "Demilitarized."
The opperation was to remove anything that was uniquely military; TACAN and IFF systems, weapon holds, special electronics racks, etc.
This was done at the Government's expense and the next step was the delivery of the aircraft to their new Civilian owners.
This is a practice that has been in place for MANY MANY MANY years and is now being added to our Nation's Legislation.

It does nothing to regulate forgien military objects because it is not intended to seek out old war articles and destroy them.
It is intended to ensure that US weapons of war are not delivered into the hands of NON-Military personel which might use them with malitious intent.
You will still be able to buy a decommisioned, demilitarized F16. The U.S.

Think about this: If the U.S. Military/Government were not able to sell used articles such as an F16 or M1 tank, then they would be throwing away money. Lots of money!
Further, according to the bill, they have to compensate any "Private owner" for anything that is recovered for "Public" use. In other words, in order for the Government (representatives of the "Public" ) to seize and destroy your Warbird, they have to pay you a "Just" compensation.  This "Just" compensation would take months of litigation to decide, and would add cost to the process.
Now they are throwing more money away.
It is just NOT going to happen.

You (and your friends) need to relax and trust that the majority of the folks in the United States, including Congressmen/Senators, will not alow a Warbird to be destroyed regardless of paper legislation!

Remember also that many of our Congressmen and Senators have Military backgrounds and share our intrest in preserving Military history.

Sincerely,
Viper

[Sharky]

Hi All,

Well I've done some reading and while I'm not yet ready to run for the hills because the sky is falling I am a little more nervious than I was.

First, I found the Munitions List that is used as a referance to designate "significant military equipment."  Unforunately any aircraft originally designed as a military aircraft is listed as "significant military equipment."  The few exceptions are some cargo aircraft that are specificly listed.

Yes that restored P-51 Mustang is by the definition of the Munitions List contained in Act 22 Chapter 39 Section 38 USC "significant military aircraft."

Now USC Act 22 Chapter 39 is not the controlling document for this bill.  It is only a referance used to determine what is concidered "significant military equipment"

Act 22 as near as I can tell basicly sets forth policy for interaction between the United States and other countries.  Chapter 39 specifically deals with import and export of military equipment or services and the Presidents power to control such trade.

Now this new bill has specific verbage about what is to be done to ensure "signicant military equipment" does not pose a threat to the general public. ie The Attorney General may require any person who, in violation of subsection (a), is in possession of significant military equipment formerly owned by the Department of Defense--

(A) to demilitarize the equipment;

(B) to have the equipment demilitarized by a third party; or

(C) to return the equipment to the Federal Government for demilitarization.

While Act 22 Chapter 39 USC may (would really have to go through it with a fine tooth comb) classify demilitarising as basicly demolishing as Bodhi described, it is not the controlling document but only (near as I can tell) a referance as it already has a handy list of "significant military equipment."

Disclaimer I am not a lawyer, just your standard Mk-1 mod-0 citizen that has a fair handle of the english language. (Except spelling, these BBS really need spell check)
What I'm posting is what I believe the documents to contain.  If you would like to read it first hand.  Go to yahoo and search for Arms Export Control Act Section 38.  That will provide you a link to the Munitions list.

A search for 22 USC 2778 will lead you to chapter 39 which talks about demilitarizing what the import export laws concerning military equipment and services are.

Sharky