[Tikirocker]

JS,

I hoped we could discuss this with civility - glad to see you are agreeable. I respectfully add below.

How can a collector's view of my rifle be "in a far more important light than myself"? There is no superior, and therefore no inferior, point-of-view of my rifle.

It's an issue of perspective and perception of historical and intrinsic value; concepts that may not be shared by another owner. What I am saying is that to many collector/shooters of Milsurps, the Historical significance of the rifle imbues it a far greater value than if it were just a common commercial hunting arm. The rifle has had a life in history, in war, in battle - it is living history and has a life of its own. Collectors understand this and respect it.

Collector/Shooters also understand the deeper value and historical significance of the firearm and give it due respect in preservation and custodianship. These collectors would not do anything to alter the firearm in any way that would damage it or deviate from original spec. The collector attributes greater value to the Milsurp than others perhaps might, hence my comment "in a far more important light".

I may attribute more value to your Milsurps than you yourself do. It is surely your property but that doesn't mean I can't care about it because many Collectors feel obligated to preserve these representations of our Military History because History belongs to all of us. Hence the sense of duty and custodianship many of us feel about our guns. We don't feel so much owners but rather care takers of Military History - we can't take them to the grave and one day they will pass to somebody else. We want to make sure these guns exist well into the future, long after we are gone.

I understand the desire to preserve the patina of history. Is it desirable? Yes. For some. Is it more ethical? No. For there to be a more ethical point-of-view means by extension that there is a less ethical point-of-view.

I think that is highly debatable ... I won't debate it with you since your view is fixed and it's not my job to make you realize anything; you either get it or you don't. I would strongly suggest that there is a duty of care to preserve our Military firearms which serve as very real representations of living history. To know what that is and to not care, is unethical in my view - and to many others also.

Like I said before, I don't radically alter my firearms because it's just not taste to do so. But I am not more or less ethical for having preserved them, regardless of what harrumphing and 'tsk-tsk'-ing serious collectors think.

That's fine ... in my view, as a collector of Military rifles, you are indeed giving ethical consideration to your rifles if you preserve them as closely to original spec as possible; and for that I thank you.

That's me - a collector and a shooter, in the original and natural sense of both words.

As am I, and yet we seem to differ in some of the finer points. How you see yourself is not for me to say.

Best, Tiki.