If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USCourts.gov)   You can have my tank when they pry it out of my cold dead hands   (ca7.uscourts.gov) divider line 45
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

11061 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jun 2002 at 10:28 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



45 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2002-06-18 10:31:07 AM  
Panzer? I hardly knew her!
 
2002-06-18 10:32:22 AM  
Your tank is welcome here, is it full up???
 
2002-06-18 10:32:23 AM  
What the hell is a .FWX file?
Flash with Xenon?
Fun Wanking Xavier?
 
2002-06-18 10:34:38 AM  


Hmmmmm.
 
2002-06-18 10:35:39 AM  


Hmmmmmm.
 
2002-06-18 10:35:42 AM  
I would have liked a warning on the pdf file.

Because, you know, it was a lot of trouble to download--took at least twelve seconds--and now my computer is shooting out sparks and stuff.
 
EMP
2002-06-18 10:36:06 AM  
Funky Wide Xlax?
 
2002-06-18 10:36:09 AM  
Too bad he lost. I wish I had a big ol M60. I wouldn't even waste my time joyriding through downtown San Diego.
 
bug
2002-06-18 10:37:43 AM  
I have Saddam's "mother of all weapons" on my back porch
 
2002-06-18 10:43:22 AM  
Spoil sports.
 
2002-06-18 10:45:22 AM  
PDF .... Yech....Please put warning next time.
 
2002-06-18 10:45:47 AM  
This is obviously an attempt by liberal-pinko-commie-hippie-soccer-moms to curtail my constitutional rights to 'keep and bear arms' for my own personal protection. Not to mention hunting those pesky rabbits that nibble on my garden.
 
2002-06-18 10:46:27 AM  
"and a modest $23 million in damages" for being roughed up a bit.
 
2002-06-18 10:50:58 AM  
I don't think the pdf file is going to kill you guys.
While were at it lets complain that there is an inapropriately labled article that needs a satire tag.

That is all
 
2002-06-18 10:51:15 AM  
Charlton Heston would be proud.
 
2002-06-18 10:59:29 AM  
He He He

I had to do it.
 
2002-06-18 11:00:07 AM  
PDFs are evil.

IMHO
 
2002-06-18 11:04:44 AM  
The site's farked from what I can tell. Nice work.
 
2002-06-18 11:07:07 AM  
A question: Up to what point does the constitution let you own weapons? Just something I wondered about... and this thing kind of bought it to mind.
 
2002-06-18 11:07:51 AM  
Anyone else notice how the court neatly sidestepped the issue of whether or not owning the tank was legal? They note it's illegal for the Army to give one to a private individual, and likely I'm certain it's illegal for a defense contractor to sell one to a private individual. But is it really illegal to own one?
 
2002-06-18 11:10:42 AM  
Oh come on, get a real internet connection and stop griping about the *.pdf files...
 
2002-06-18 11:11:17 AM  
Obligatory Geek:

Mozilla on my Linux workstation knew what the file was despite the funky extension, and automatically opened the file for display.

Oh, and I think that the Army was a bunch of dumbasses to take his tank away. 'Course since they ventilated it with 120mm APFSDS the whole point is moot.
 
2002-06-18 11:14:28 AM  
Could someone please answer how the general public is going to defend against a totalitarian government with hand guns?
 
2002-06-18 11:15:04 AM  
I want a tank. If I had a tank I'd be running this town inside a week.
 
2002-06-18 11:16:50 AM  
Who has that pic of the kid in the tank costume?
 
2002-06-18 11:19:50 AM  
Boobies!

Oh, wait...
 
2002-06-18 11:20:22 AM  
As I first started reading the article, I thought the government was being typically reactionary in taking the tank away. However, as I continued to read, I started agreeing more and more with the government. I mean, the guy obtained the tank under more or less false pretenses and didn't follow through on his contract to have the national guard demilitarize it. So you more or less have a crazy old farmer with a functional tank sitting in his back yard. That's just asking for trouble.
 
2002-06-18 11:22:49 AM  
Great, we farked the government, looks like IRS audits for everybody!

3Horn
 
2002-06-18 11:30:31 AM  
I went to the website & was gonna send the story to everyone on my contact list but my attempt to get back there was no go... Its been FARKED!! as 3horn put it
"Great, we farked the government, looks like IRS audits for everybody! "
 
2002-06-18 11:42:56 AM  
how can a gov site be farked? where are my tax dollars going, anyway?
 
2002-06-18 11:44:00 AM  
Mirror. This is my little linux web server on an ADSL line, so it may go fairly slow, but it should work if the other link is farked.
 
2002-06-18 11:44:29 AM  
Mirror. This is my little linux web server on an ADSL line, so it may go fairly slow, but it should work if the other link is farked.
 
2002-06-18 11:45:18 AM  
While it certainly does suck for him that he didn't get to keep the M60A3 (still a fairly modern and lethal piece of hardware, in the right hands), the government was well within their rights. He used VFW property and material to draft a letter for personal use (and in doing so decieved the government - they hate competition!), put the tank on private property and then failed to have the tank decomissioned as he promised to do.

BigAl, you can own pretty much any kind of military vehicle you want - as long as it's not classified (e.g., an M1-series Abrams with it's secret composite armor plating) or still in use by the US Military (e.g., no F15 Fighter for you, Mr. rich playboy). Many private citizens in the U.S. own fully mobile main battle tanks from many eras, all the way up to - yes - the M60A3. As noted it's replacement (the M1 series) has a classified type of composite armor. Other folks (Steve Ballmer and his MiG29 being a notable one) own "military" aircraft. The Confederate Air Force* has a larger air force than many small nations, although it's comprised of demilitarized aircraft.

There are some limitations, however. The noted CAF wanted to purchase and fly a Convair B36 bomber (a gigantic strategic bomber from the late '40s early '50s), however, international law regarding private ownership of nuclear-capable strategic-ranged aircraft kept it from happening.

Ultimately, it's not any specific vehicle - up to a point. It's that the vehicle in question can't perform it's function any longer (e.g., external bomb-racks and targeting systems removed, or main gun and machine guns removed etc. etc.).

*CAF = privately owned air-show/military museum; nothing to do with the redneck "confederates".
 
2002-06-18 11:46:18 AM  
Mods - I don't know what I was doing on that Boobies, please remove.
 
2002-06-18 11:48:34 AM  
Jayd42: Volume.
 
bug
2002-06-18 11:54:21 AM  
 
2002-06-18 11:56:34 AM  
FlightDeck
Thanks for that. Something I've been wondering about for a while. It makes sense that it's anything that isn't classified, although it means I'll stop saving up my $200 million for that stealth fighter I've always wanted!

Where abouts does military weapons start? Is a machine gun legal?

*CAF = privately owned air-show/military museum; nothing to do with the redneck "confederates".

Thank god for that!! I was getting more and more scared reading through that post.
 
2002-06-18 11:59:24 AM  
Damn Filter, you know what I meant to say.
 
2002-06-18 12:18:20 PM  
The "Confederate Air Force" has been renamed the "Commemorative Air Force". Although I disdain the need to respond to political correctness, it is a nice compromise for a name.

Anyways, the 2nd ammendment doesn't say anything about the right to bear ammunition. So, we can legalize all the guns we want, and make ammunition illegal.
 
2002-06-18 03:10:55 PM  
Owning a machine gun is perfectly legal, so long as you have a Class 3 Firearms license.

Have fun getting it, though.
 
2002-06-18 03:29:41 PM  
Certain fully automatic weapons are legal with the proper license. The license used to cost about $400.00/year, but I think this price went up substantially a few years ago. The license covers light assault weapons, but I don't know whether you can get a license for actual machine guns.

Big Al, the Constitution doesn't define the rights of citizens, but it strictly defines the role of government. So, technically, the Constitution "allows" you to do whatever you damn well please, but it creates limited powers of government to keep you in line.

The only thing it says about guns is that the government can't infringe upon the people's right to keep and bear arms. People have been arguing for about 100 years over who "the people" are (individuals vs. organized militia). Strangely, they've argued less over what "arms" means. Everyone generally agrees that 7-Eleven shouldn't sell 105mm Howitzers, and no one has a credible argument that I have to give up my 12 guage. Between those positions, though, you can find almost any argument you like. You might conclude that no one really wants to find out what the answer is.

Happy shooting!
 
2002-06-18 06:17:30 PM  
Of course you can have a tank.
Where does it say you can't have one?
Sure, the Army can't just go around handing them out - Tax Payers own those... but there is nothing stating that you can't have one.

In fact, there are many tanks in private collections. Some quite modern too. As current as a T-72. Not to mention the other privately owned armored vehicles such as BMP's and BTR's.
Hell, I'd love to own a BTR. All it is, is a multi-wheeled armoured JEEP. I'll take one. Hand it over. I'll drive it to work. To get some Milk and Bread. Cruise the village on a date with my wife. No problem.
My wife already drives around a similar vehicle. A 1978 Jeep Wagoneer with a 401 V-8. If that isn't a tank, nothing is.
 
2002-06-18 06:38:18 PM  
There privatly owned tanks also do not have an operating gun or weapon systems either. Usally they rent then to the movie studios and make $$$.
 
2002-06-18 08:09:50 PM  
Yup. There is some cat in California that has a large collection of WWII tanks, allied and axis. Where do you think hollywood gets the tanks to make those flicks?
 
2002-06-18 10:13:35 PM  
For crying out loud, let the guy have his tank! Did you see how much he diligently went through just to get it? He had if for some time without going on a rampage with it, and I assume it was demilitarized before it was sent to him, so let him have his memorial. This is silly.
Poor guy.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report