Brand New MRAPS Being Scrapped - A Sad Day

[porkysplace]

opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:

 

[saddamsnightmare]

February 26th, 2014.

Poor Old Jingo John:

He just doesn't realize that an MRAP really doesn't have any place in America on the streets outside of the military or possibly for use by the police. They are heavy, the visibility is poor from the cab, and they are a threat to any vehicle much smaller then they are. Further, if they get into the hands of criminals or terrorists, they would pose an almost insoluble problem for the police to effectively stop. Does anyone remember the guy who stole the M-60 tank in California a couple of decades ago?
You are entitled to your opinion, but the minute one of those gets into criminal hands, the PD's had better stock up on LAW's and HAW's, as short of a tank, an MRAP is almost indestructible. And ask yourself why you can't own a tank that is fully operational....probably for the same general reason.

I would say that the lack of civility on this site often shades over to a political diatribe, but then, that's an opinion too. Please do permit me to point out that the TM's referenced above may go to good use in safely maintaining the man's 923, so for that, I thank the members on here who took the time to upload, or download them. There are members here who do have concern for the general safety of the public and for the other members, the preservation of this hobby often hangs on the thin thread of public perception, Huffington Post, Fox News, or MSNBC or CNN. That awareness should make us more thoughtful, given that we have lately been tarred for an action on BLM lands that a bad egg managed to post on YouTube....

It should be food for thought.


N.B. Gun grabber indeed! I suspect the man has no clue where I am from or what views I hold, but then that is his opinion. I am probably more conservative then some, but do remember that I place my life on the line daily in service of the American people as an NPS Ranger. We are faced with the same criminal elements you meet with elsewhere, and I would not like to face a deranged individual with an MRAP. Personal opinion here, gents, nothing more.


Please note the following post below. Fellow members, I do believe it is indeed time to get the popcorn out, as there seems to be on other solution to the diatribeopcorn:. And, further I might suggest that you volunteer to work with the local PD's or National Parks as a VIP. If you think you are currently well informed on the dangers we face daily, you might learn something more useful then your present mindset. I work very hard to protect my visitors and the park resources, so I will ask,what have you done lately to improve your world?


Have a good evening, stay warm!

 

[JingoJohn]

HUH? Sounds strangely like the mantra of gun grabbers.
Oooommmmm evil hardware, Ooooommm evil hardware. Ooommm (text representation of commie chanting mantra)

LOGIC will never break through the DOGMA of gun grabbers OR "people" who want to be sheep.

I won't waste more of my precious time on DOGMATISTS.

 

[Another Ahab]

And all along I was thinking MRAP was maybe just some new kind of tunes:

- Gotz 2 Git Wid It Brah

 

[jesusgatos]

...this is NOT a political statement! This is a statement of FACT.

This is not the place to share those kind 'facts'. Please stop posting political stuff here. You're going to get this thread closed/deleted.

 

[sigo]

February 26th, 2014.
MRAP is almost indestructible. And ask yourself why you can't own a tank that is fully operational....probably for the same general reason.

Ummm, you cant own a tank? Since when? Better get the word out quick. There are many privately owned armored vehicles out there. Including dozens owned by members here on SteelSoldiers.

MRAPs are not a threat to the public any more than the armored vehicles already out there. When is the last time a privately owned armored vehicle was used in the commission of a crime? I'd be surprised if anyone can cite an example. The M60 mentioned above was a CA National Guard tank, and the "kill-dozer" was not an armored vehicle as designed. It was an ordinary bulldozer home brewed into an armored contraption.

 

[Another Ahab]

Ummm, you cant own a tank? Since when? Better get the word out quick. There are many privately owned armored vehicles out there. Including dozens owned by members here on SteelSoldiers.

MRAPs are not a threat to the public any more than the armored vehicles already out there. When is the last time a privately owned armored vehicle was used in the commission of a crime? I'd be surprised if anyone can cite an example. The M60 mentioned above was a CA National Guard tank, and the "kill-dozer" was not an armored vehicle as designed. It was an ordinary bulldozer home brewed into an armored contraption.

Reasonable is a matter of degrees also:

- Should hardware like battleships and subs (de-"milled") be offered for sale to the public?

- Noting that there are now Billionaire individuals with that kind of buying power.

- Might take some heat off the taxpayer if we could recoup some of those costs.

I'm not prone to tackle this debate, but maybe some others are. Headed here toward the Hijack Zone however.

 

[sigo]

Ahab,
I say why not. I've seen ex-military subs for sale. Why not an old DD, BB, or CG if you can afford it. They're probably available now if you have the money. Remember the DuPont M113 purchased directly from FMC? If an individual or corporation had the finances and motivation to purchase, operate and maintain an ex military sub, I imagine they would attract attention long before they were able to procure the ordnance necessary to turn it into a weapon.

Wheeled and tracked armor aren't comparable to ship and subs, but the same principles apply in my mind. The weapons and ordnance are already highly regulated, and if you have the resources required to procure, operate and maintain wheeled and tracked armor you're likely not interested in robbing liquor stores or knocking off the bank down the street. Again, I don't see ships, subs, wheeled vehicles, tracked vehicles, trucks, jeeps, or trailers owed by law abiding citizens as a threat to the public. How is an MRAP any more of a threat than a modified Komatsu D355A or maybe even a hardened Peterbilt?

 

[saddamsnightmare]

February 27th, 2014.

When I mentioned tanks, I meant fully operational, as in main mount operative. But I might also point out to the comment on subs, anyone notice the drug lords in Columbia buying or building semi-submersibles to avoid radar detection? From there it is only a small step to buying and using, say, Russian navy surplus subs in illegal endeavors. As for myself, I have patently decided that I shall not trade barbs, or even serious thoughts, with folks less inclined to be introspective.

The MRAP was purpose built to be nearly indestructible, the hardened Peterbilt in your example, or the Komatsu was not and thus contained defects in design. However, your logic is not followed to the end, as you are thereby justifying the destruction of property or lives by any deranged individual that can build or obtain such a beast. Between you and I, I will always give the stopping power to the military or the PD's, as they are apt to use it in our service, not to destroy or take life idly.

However, please note in "Politics affecting the hobby", " Representation Clarification"

the following post from M16TY:

"Think of it this way, leave the ex-military truck aspect out of it. These trucks are government surplus that do not pass federal safety standards. It makes no difference if you are a collector, commercial business that uses these trucks, or just somebody who likes a big 6X6, if they get banned or restricted from public use, everybody that owns one of these (or hopes to own one in the future) will be affected.

Let a couple of high profile accidents happen with these trucks and there's a good chance we could all suffer. When they restrict them from public use everybody that owns one will suffer, it doesn't make a difference what you use it for or what you think it represents. "

Pretty much this is the point I was trying to make on the MRAP's, and by extension, Armor. I will place the thought in front of you that if a civilian lays hands on a functional MRAP, or tank, and does something exceptionally stupid or criminal with it, your truck or vehicle may be the next one recalled on a Demil Code change. We have seen it happen on the HMMWV's, just because AM General did not want to affect their sales of the H-1. If that had happened after WWII, how many MB,M38, and M38A1's would we now have?

The pot is not worth stirring unless something positive comes out of it. So I shall not stir further.​

 

[Mercunimog404]

February 27th, 2014.

When I mentioned tanks, I meant fully operational, as in main mount operative. But I might also point out to the comment on subs, anyone notice the drug lords in Columbia buying or building semi-submersibles to avoid radar detection? From there it is only a small step to buying and using, say, Russian navy surplus subs in illegal endeavors. As for myself, I have patently decided that I shall not trade barbs, or even serious thoughts, with folks less inclined to be introspective.

The MRAP was purpose built to be nearly indestructible, the hardened Peterbilt in your example, or the Komatsu was not and thus contained defects in design. However, your logic is not followed to the end, as you are thereby justifying the destruction of property or lives by any deranged individual that can build or obtain such a beast. Between you and I, I will always give the stopping power to the military or the PD's, as they are apt to use it in our service, not to destroy or take life idly.

However, please note in "Politics affecting the hobby", " Representation Clarification"

the following post from M16TY:

"Think of it this way, leave the ex-military truck aspect out of it. These trucks are government surplus that do not pass federal safety standards. It makes no difference if you are a collector, commercial business that uses these trucks, or just somebody who likes a big 6X6, if they get banned or restricted from public use, everybody that owns one of these (or hopes to own one in the future) will be affected.

Let a couple of high profile accidents happen with these trucks and there's a good chance we could all suffer. When they restrict them from public use everybody that owns one will suffer, it doesn't make a difference what you use it for or what you think it represents. "

Pretty much this is the point I was trying to make on the MRAP's, and by extension, Armor. I will place the thought in front of you that if a civilian lays hands on a functional MRAP, or tank, and does something exceptionally stupid or criminal with it, your truck or vehicle may be the next one recalled on a Demil Code change. We have seen it happen on the HMMWV's, just because AM General did not want to affect their sales of the H-1. If that had happened after WWII, how many MB,M38, and M38A1's would we now have?

The pot is not worth stirring unless something positive comes out of it. So I shall not stir further.​

Actually. The mrap was not purpose built to be indestructible. It was designed to sacrifice itself to save the crews life.

 

[sigo]

They also don't have a main gun.

 

[swbradley1]

If another mod wants to open this drivel back then have at it.