AMD65 Pic-Afghan Army

[amd65]

The AMD65 seems to be a popular weapon in Afghanistan--I have seen several pics of them.
This one showed up today. Looks like he has a 40 round mag in it, which is easier to insert with the fore grip.
Note also, the muzzle break has the ports in the vertical orientation.

[Buelligan]

My daughter is going over there in feb, my be she can bring back a demill ? She likes the ak better then her M4.

[CGSteve]

Yes, I too have seen AMD 65s predominantly in pics of Afghanistan.

No bringbacks of weapons or weapons part of any kind now. She may be able to slip small parts or magazines, but she'll undoubtedly be in serious trouble if she were caught. This is assuming that she is with the military. If she were a contractor or something, I've been reading they have a lot more leeway in stuff like that.

Deacts can't even be purchased from retailers (foreign) that have them, else everyone would be buying them from rusmilitary.com.

[Buelligan]

I just asked her about it and she said NO WAY, its not like it used to be . that She will get in deep SH&t if she dosent turn in a weapon or takes on apart to send home. That shows ya what i know, so now i know that . THANKS ALL . Whats the big deal if you demill it ?

[danielsand]

Stupid political correctness of the Clinton era refuses to die. Took a lot of fun away from us.
Even going to the war is no fun any more.

[Otis61]

I just asked her about it and she said NO WAY, its not like it used to be . that She will get in deep SH&t if she dosent turn in a weapon or takes on apart to send home. That shows ya what i know, so now i know that . THANKS ALL . Whats the big deal if you demill it ?

The government still has to have their fingers in it.

[CGSteve]

I just asked her about it and she said NO WAY, its not like it used to be . that She will get in deep SH&t if she dosent turn in a weapon or takes on apart to send home. That shows ya what i know, so now i know that . THANKS ALL . Whats the big deal if you demill it ?

The deal about DEACT weapons per ATF "expertise" is it is still considered a "machine gun". Their "logic" is "once a machine gun, always a machine gun".

On our way back from Iraq, there were Air Force personnel doing the customs check and they made us dump our seabags and checked everything. We had to be wanded, and walk through a metal detector. We also have to sit through a little brief about "war trophies" and "souvenirs" or whatever it was.

In actuality, bringing back weapons was always illegal, even in WWII, it's just that people had more sense back then and felt that if soldiers earned something by taking it from the enemy who no longer needed it, or by virtue of simply being there, then they should be abe to keep it. Of course there is always the issue of an officer saying to an enlisted man that he had contraband, only to take it home for himself.

[amd65]

I don't think it was illegal in WWII--there was a process in place, and bringback papers were issued. My Father brought home a Norwegian Colt 45 from Europe, and I have the paper typed in Arles, France allowing him to do so. He also had a collection of German machine guns he was going to bring home. They were to be de-activated, but it was allowed. Unfortunately, he went into the hospital with dysentary, and they were stolen.

[cwo4uscgret]

Stupid political correctness of the Clinton era refuses to die. Took a lot of fun away from us.
Even going to the war is no fun any more.

have been unauthorized a lot longer then before the Clinton Era. In 1983, under President Reagan, the US, along with the Caribbean Defense Coalition, invaded Grenada. Several service members, including a General who attempted to bring a CONEX box full of captured weapons into the US, were disciplined.

Even though I do not like President Clinton's actions while in the White House, he isn't responsible for all that's wrong in the US.

Don't forget - it doesn't matter who is President; Congress enacts legislation (law).

[danielsand]

Sorry, I forgot to put a "smiley" in there. I thought it'll be obvious with a line about "being fun to go to war".

So I guess a little explanation is needed. It's NO FUN to go to war. But the "war trophies" were getting in easier from Vietnam, Desert Storm, and Panama. They are still coming in, and it's "illegal" as it's been since WW2. But if you have contact with the right people, stuff can get in.

[amd65]

Again, I don't believe it was "illegal" till after VietNam to bring home otherwise legal firearms such as rifles and handguns.
I think it is a crime that our service people cannot bring home an otherwise legal firearm, perhaps one that they could buy here when they get home.

[okie shooter]

It was legal in vietnam, thus why a captured sks was so more valuable to troops than ak's for trading fodder. A troop could and did get sks rifles back here, but as carried an ak was not allowed to be treated as a war trophy.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_prfr/is_200304/ai_3290519093/print

found this above, Guess there is some theater guideance in whats allowed.



Air Force, Central Command set war trophy policy
Scott Elliott 4/21/2003 - WASHINGTON -- Servicemembers deployed supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom may be tempted to bring home souvenirs of their war experience, but Air Force legal officials are urging them to think twice.
Depending on the item, bringing home a "war trophy" could lead to court-martial, said Lt. Col. Karen L. Manos, legal staff officer in the Air Force's operations law division at the Pentagon.
Air Force Joint Instruction 31-217, "Control and Registration of War Trophies and War Trophy Firearms," has been in effect since the Vietnam era, Manos said. The instruction specifies what a servicemember must do to legally bring home a war trophy, and lists items that are not allowed to be brought home.
"(The instruction) lets you bring home certain things, but it requires written permission from the theater commander," Manos said. "If you don't get permission, it would be like theft -- it would actually violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice and (the perpetrator) could be court-martialed."
Two airmen were prosecuted by court-martial for violating the instruction following Operation Desert Storm.
According to the instruction, servicemembers are not allowed to claim the following as trophies:
-- Property belonging to the United States or an allied nation.
-- Nameplates pulled from any type of equipment.
-- Live ammunition, flammables, explosives or any item containing explosives.
-- Weapons that are defined as firearms by the National Firearms Act.
-- Electronic equipment, such as radios or radar.
-- Government-owned or privately owned equipment of the enemy that is not designed for individual issue.
-- Government-owned or privately owned articles of a household nature that have intrinsic value, such as coin collections or jewelry.
-- Religious items.
-- Items that have military research, training or intelligence value.
-- Items obtained in violation of international law.
-- Weapons that emit gas.
One potential gray area in the instruction is the collection of nonlethal items of vague military value, the colonel said.
"A lot of people are collecting things like pictures of Saddam Hussein and Iraqi flags," she said. "A potential argument would be that it's government-owned equipment not designed to be issued to an individual. It would probably be OK, but you'd still need permission to bring it home."
Besides the Air Force joint instruction, Central Command General Order 1A prohibits weapons, munitions and military articles and equipment from being brought home as souvenirs.
Customs laws and postal regulations also prohibit shipment of certain items through the mail. According to the Air Force's chief of postal policy, sending hazardous material through the mail could endanger innocent bystanders because the military often uses commercial airlines to carry its mail.
"Commercial airlines have a requirement to provide safe flights to their passengers," Bob Eichholz said. "We don't want the Federal Aviation Administration or commercial carriers to start putting restrictions on our mail."
Manos said that, besides safety concerns, the instruction and general orders are intended to help the American military keep the moral high ground.
"They were established for good order and discipline," she said. "We don't want to have U.S. servicemembers acting like those of some other nations, where they can be accused of pillaging and stealing everything in sight."
The key thing to remember, Manos said, is that there is a right way to collect and bring home souvenirs -- servicemembers simply have to follow the rules.
"The regulations recognize that servicemembers want to be able to bring something home to show they were part of a war and played an important part," she said. "The regulations are a way of controlling a natural human desire -- they're just making sure it doesn't get out of hand."

Heres another article newer on the subject

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/06/marine_wartrophies_061508w/



Keeping war trophies is a slippery slope




By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jun 17, 2008 12:26:33 EDT
OCEANSIDE, Calif. — It might not get you into as much trouble, but that little Tabasco bottle filled with Iraqi sand is as illegal as a fully automatic AK47.
Both items violate federal rules for bringing stuff back from the war zone. Sure, the feds don’t routinely raid houses in the middle of the night looking for tiny bottles of dirt, but U.S. Customs officials are serious about keeping foreign soil from leaving foreign soil, fearful that bugs and germs could be spread from overseas.
Unfortunately, the rules and regulations for bringing home war trophies and other souvenirs from combat zones are often vague, and interpretations vary from command to command. Many people choose to bring nothing back for fear of landing in hot water, while some throw caution to the wind and sneak back items that any recruit knows are bad news.
War trophies

Consider the case of Sgt. Leonardo San Juan Jr., a reconnaissance Marine who was indicted by a federal grand jury Nov. 29 in San Diego for possessing an illegal AK47 assault rifle.
The case began in 2006, when San Juan’s then-fiancee told an instructor at an Oceanside indoor shooting range of 50 AK47 machine guns that her boyfriend had sneaked in from Iraq and stored in their garage. The woman, who is now San Juan’s wife, “elaborated that he would sneak them back in medical kit bags,” according to government documents filed with the U.S. District Court in San Diego.
The range instructor, a Marine reservist, notified police. Agents with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service searched the apartment and garage three days later and found one AK47 machine gun amid a stash of military clothing and gear belonging to San Juan, court documents state.
The AK47 was “a functional, fully-automatic,” weapon made in Bulgaria in 1969 and “issued to the Iraqi National Forces,” according to the documents. The weapon was not registered in the federal firearms database, as is required by law, and San Juan wasn’t authorized or registered to possess a fully automatic weapon, the documents state. San Juan was charged by the federal government, and his trial was scheduled for the morning of June 2.
But the sergeant instead accepted a plea deal with federal prosecutors, and he is expected to be fined during sentencing later this summer.
Know the rules

Collecting war souvenirs is a practice as old as combat itself. Roman armor, Spartan shields and other spoils of war often were displayed as war trophies, and relics from modern-day battles have found homes in museums, quarterdecks and living rooms.
“There’s no doubt in my mind that it happens all the time,” said Jane Siegel, a retired colonel and attorney in San Marcos, Calif. “All you have to do is to go into the senior headquarters buildings and you see all the junk that is displayed.
“I know officers who have brought souvenirs back home and who had them framed in their dens,” Siegel said, noting that theater regulations at the early stages of the Afghanistan and Iraq operations were “very specific” and provided few exceptions.
Service members in World War II and Vietnam faced fewer rules than those in place today. Military regulations and international laws of war prevent the pillaging of government property, personal items and black-market goods, and control what service members are allowed to bring home. The Corps’ standing order on “Control and Registration of War Trophies and War Trophy Firearms” — MCO 5800.6A — dates back to 1969, when the rules began to tighten as Vietnam began winding down.
War trophies aren’t by themselves illegal, and military regulations and U.S. federal law permit some keepsakes. But the rules are vague and often don’t state exactly what’s OK and what’s not; sometimes, interpretations have varied.
Dirt and rocks are prohibited, as are artwork and rugs taken from a house. Some knives and bayonets are allowed, but not all. Some captured weapons are allowed but must be rendered unserviceable in accordance with federal firearms laws.
General Order No. 1B, issued by U.S. Central Command on March 13, 2006, spells out the rules for service members in the Middle East. The order prohibits: “Taking or retaining of public or private property of an enemy or former enemy. ... Individual war souvenirs may only be acquired if specifically authorized by USCENTCOM. Absent such express authorization, no weapon, munitions or military article of equipment obtained or acquired by any means other than official issue may be retained for personal use or shipped out of the USCENTCOM [area of operations] for personal retention.”
Commanders, “when based on military necessity,” can seize private or public property, and “unit retention of historical artifacts must be specifically approved by USCENTCOM,” the order states. It also permits tourist souvenirs that can be legally brought into the U.S. but bans “enemy war material” even if it can be legally bought.
General Order No. 1B — which also famously bans alcohol and pornography — applies to uniformed members in the combat theater, as well as most contingency contractor personnel serving with, accompanying or employed by the armed forces.
The order supersedes the previous version, General Order No. 1A, issued in 2000 and revised in 2001 and 2003, which held a more relaxed standard for many items.
The existing order rescinds all waivers issued by General Order No. 1A, making it unclear what happens to those war trophies that once were permitted.
Enforcing the law

Officials say service members who violate the order by bringing illegal or unauthorized war trophies to the U.S. risk possible criminal charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, such as violating a general order, Article 92, and larceny and wrongful appropriation, Article 121.
“The commander, whatever level that may be — battalion commander, regimental commander, division commander, et cetera — can dispose of a case in a certain way, i.e., from no punishment to a general court-martial,” said Lt. Col. Sean Gibson, a Marine Corps Forces-Central Command spokesman.
U.S. Customs agents at airfields and departure points, such as Kuwait and Balad Air Base in Iraq, inspect military personnel before they leave the combat zone. Defense transportation laws dictate what is allowed or prohibited on military transports, and federal postal laws restrict what you are allowed to send by U.S. mail.
“Our job is to really enforce the regulations that all sorts of agencies have,” said Michael Friel, a U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman in Washington.
Items considered contraband are confiscated by military or law enforcement authorities, but service members often can ditch suspected illegal items in amnesty boxes.
Service members must fill out Defense Department Form 603-1 and get approval from superiors before they can take home their war trophies, but that doesn’t mean souvenirs can’t include odd items. Retired Col. Gary Wilson had to get approval to bring home two fragments from a rocket that exploded in a 2005 roadside bomb, wounding him and others, and damaging his vehicle.
The paperwork drill “wasn’t so bad,” Wilson said. “I had to take it down to the [staff judge advocate] and I had to get the CO to sign it.” The shrapnel now sits in a closet in his California house.
“I don’t remember it being a big deal until 2005 or 2006,” he said of the regulations, “because people were moving stuff back, stuff they had picked up, like bayonets and helmets.”
Gibson said he did not have comprehensive statistics on the number of MarCent cases or investigations into illegal war trophies. Requests for similar data from Central Command, Customs and Border Patrol, and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service were pending as of June 6.
Military restrictions of war trophies are designed to control illegal weapons or controlled items from entering the U.S. Safety is also a concern, especially when some want to keep ammunition or explosives as keepsakes.
“Leave it to a Marine,” Siegel said, “and they’ll blow themselves up.” Such incidents “are exactly the type of thing that the order is designed to prevent.”
What not to do

Some cases of war-zone souvenirs have made headlines in recent years:
* In 2003, Sgt. Mark S. Hoerber of Miami boarded the amphibious assault ship Saipan with members of 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade carrying a fragmentation round packed with his gear. A round exploded in a trash can in a berthing space May 7, 2003, wounding 10 Marines, one of them seriously. In 2004, Hoerber admitted having a war souvenir but denied his trophy caused the explosion. He was convicted at court-martial, confined for a month and busted in rank.
* Gunnery Sgt. Gary Maziarz allegedly took a stash of Iraq war booty, including AK47s, Dragunov sniper rifles and pistols. Maziarz was prosecuted in 2007 and agreed to a plea deal that gave him a 26-month sentence in exchange for testifying in an ongoing federal intelligence breach investigation.
* An Army Green Beret, Sgt. 1st Class David N. Kellerman, was indicted by a federal grand jury in 2006 and later charged with attempting to import stolen firearms and explosives from Afghanistan. Among the items he allegedly collected were grenades, high-powered weapons and C4 explosives. A search of his personal boat found several unregistered firearms, including three fully-automatic machine guns, an AK47, a Sterling 9mm and a Russian 7.62mm, according to court documents filed in the case, being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
* In one guns-for-cash-and-drugs plot, seven British soldiers were convicted of smuggling AK47s, pistols, ammunition and other weapons from Iraq in 2005 and 2006. In 2005, a British Royal Marine who brought back weapons, including an AK47, rocket-propelled grenade launcher and 60mm mortar, got a two-year sentence.
* Customs agents in 2002 confiscated sheep skulls carried by some Marines at Camp Lejeune, N.C, upon their beach return from Afghanistan, according to a 2003 Pentagon news release.


It sounds like alot of guys are getting in trouble with things that are illegal to possess or own, under just existing us explosives and gun laws. War Trophies are not a way around the ban of all new automatic firearms.

[ackspac]

The Marine Reservist should of got his ass kicked for ratting-out a fellow war vet. I heard he only admitted to bringing one AK back from the litter-box, not the 50 his wife claimed. I say more power to those who serve our country and find a way to bring back a momento. I know of one vet who brought back a box of AK mags from Afganistan with no problems. Although he said every-one of them had problems feeding. Sorry for the rant but I just hate to hear that story.

[cwo4uscgret]

The Marine Reservist should of got his ass kicked for ratting-out a fellow war vet. I heard he only admitted to bringing one AK back from the litter-box, not the 50 his wife claimed. I say more power to those who serve our country and find a way to bring back a momento. I know of one vet who brought back a box of AK mags from Afganistan with no problems. Although he said every-one of them had problems feeding. Sorry for the rant but I just hate to hear that story.

So you condone illegal activity that negatively impacts the gun rights of those of us who choose to be legal in what we do?

Swell.

[amd65]

Bringing home an automatic weapon is one thing. A handgun exactly the same as one you could buy at any gun shop is another. If a service member takes a trophy pistol from an enemy, they should be allowed to keep it. The 45 my Father brought home is perhaps my most treasured possesion, and it will stay in my family forever.

[Cavalryman]

Even going to the war is no fun any more.

LOL! Going to the war wasn't bad, and coming home was great! It was just that time in between...:icon_biggrin:

[okie shooter]

I guess the rules are there guys on bringing back stuff. From what I am reading you need to fill out two forms to ask for permission to bring back a weapon, but its specific in the fact you cannot bring back anything that is illegal to possess in this nation. Thus as its been stated that every troop knows them, and as we all know here is you cannot own automatic weapons. Thus the marine that got busted deserved it, as we all would if we assembled fully automatic aks from our kits here. Where does it say you get to break the laws of the nation to have a war trophy?

[CGSteve]

Well there were some guys who brought back AKs from Vietnam somehow and the feds gave people who had them a grace period to register them before a certain date. After that date and still not "registered", forget that you ever served, they'll enforce those arbitrary laws in full force.

I prefer to stay "legal" as well. I guess we are venturing into political ideology here, which many gun owners say the ATF is on the wrong side of what's "legal". I will not volunteer to be a test case because I know I will lose that battle, but I will always and forever be opposed to arbitrary laws that state certain firearms are magically "illegal". The only people who give gun owners a bad name are really just the complete criminals. Those who are thugs, gangsters, etc. you see on TV who murder, rape, burgle, rob, etc. etc. Everything else are arbitrary laws, enforcing victimless crimes (922; NFA, etc.). Hence, "illegal". :rolleyes:

Yes, I messed up before stating that all bringbacks were illegal during WWII, but I think things like MP38s, Thompsons, etc. were, unless snuck back.

ETA: No okie shooter, no one brings back weapons. Going by my own experience, that was explicity stated. IIRC, bayonets and knives were also a no go. They even gave my friend a hassle for having a foreign ID card (though I read in your post how that could be a no go...).

Last Edit: Well this thread wasn't about the legality of bringbacks, or the moral weight of what should and should not be legal/illegal so apologies for getting everyone that deep into it. I just signed up and already I feel I have ostracized myself from many for my political philosophy. :icon_biggrin:

[danielsand]

The 'two face' approach of our government is what I don't care for. We are "good enough" to be issued ANYTHING that our G has in it's arsenal to go and kill foreigners, but we can not be trusted to have the same weapons at home?

And WHY are we not trusted?

Think about it.

[okie shooter]

I guess on the current state of bringbacks, they are within regulations to be brought back, there is a process if you want to attempt bringing them back within the regulations, but it sounds like command is not allowing it. The paperwork is still available, the two applications required are out there on the servers. As for guys bringing back ak's from vietnam, at that time there was not a ban on new fully automatic weapons at the time(thus with the right paperwork you could still import a full auto weapon of any type almost). Now there is thus a full auto ak no matter what would be a no no.

I think its been stated, a few guys bringing back stuff that is illegal, pushes the curve to say no to all bringbacks to eliminate any problems, and also any grey areas. By making a command decision to say no to all, draws a very definate line not to be crossed.

[okie shooter]

The 'two face' approach of our government is what I don't care for. We are "good enough" to be issued ANYTHING that our G has in it's arsenal to go and kill foreigners, but we can not be trusted to have the same weapons at home?

And WHY are we not trusted?

Think about it.
You are not banned from owning and using the same weapons the goverment issues. You just cannot make any new ones, unless for LEO, but if you can find one made before 1986, all you do is apply to get it transfered, pay for the weapon and the tax. Thus our goverment may have limited the numbers of weapons out there, but you can still get one. As for affording it and such, thats up to you.

The Hughes admendment just stopped the manfacture of any new fully automatic weapons, thus limiting the supply. Show me where it says you cannot go out and get one, if you can pass the standards of the nfa of 1934.

[ackspac]

So you condone illegal activity that negatively impacts the gun rights of those of us who choose to be legal in what we do?

Swell.
Good ole John Kerry admitted to bringing back an Ak-47 from Vietnam, no punishment for him. The Marine in question was not going on a rampage with the one he brought back. You'd think our govt. would crack down on the scum that sneak things into our borders that do the real harm to our citizens. My brother had a friend who brought an Ak-47 back from Vietnam in 1970. It hung on his wall till Billary became president. Another point is there is (or was at one time) a code of trust among servicemen. Its not like he went out and raped and killed someone. Put yourself in this guys shoes for a minute. Your getting shot at every day, not knowing if your comming back home in a bag or not. You come accross a nice AK (or other weapon) and you know a surfire way to get it home without getting caught. Im not stealling from my fellow Marines, or anyone else of respect. I would feel deserving of earning this trophy. If the guy came back and bragged about pulling a Rambo (which did not happen), then it might be different. I guess it would fall in line as bringing a 30 round mag accross comunist California lines.

[CGSteve]

You are not banned from owning and using the same weapons the goverment issues. You just cannot make any new ones, unless for LEO, but if you can find one made before 1986, all you do is apply to get it transfered, pay for the weapon and the tax. Thus our goverment may have limited the numbers of weapons out there, but you can still get one. As for affording it and such, thats up to you.

The Hughes admendment just stopped the manfacture of any new fully automatic weapons, thus limiting the supply. Show me where it says you cannot go out and get one, if you can pass the standards of the nfa of 1934.

Darn, I wasn't planning on saying anymore after my last edit but I have to respond to this.

The thing about it is okie shooter, is that even though you can own a select fire weapon pre 1986, the legislation is designed to keep it away from most citizens. The reason they are so expensive because they are finite due to new ones being illegal. Thus, it is a de facto ban even on ones that you are "allowed" to own. The entire purpose was to keep it out of the hands of common folks, and the illegality raising the price to such unrealistic levels does just that.

Anyone who can own firearms can pass the standards of NFA of 1934. The question is, why is it even there? Who let this happen to begin with? The country never had problems with "machine guns", and the only time we did was directly related to Prohibition, and even then, it was limited to a distinct element of society fighting it out with each other. How much sense does it make to "allow" select fire weapons made pre 1986 and not ones made after? Are guns made in 1987 more dangerous than the ones made in 86?

Take a look at the wording of the Heller decision; antis now use the terms put forth by Justice Scalia in reference to "unusual weapons not in common use" and argue that "machine guns" fall into this category because they are not in "common use"...but that is only because they arbitrarily banned them from our use in the first place.

I understand rights are not absolute, but banning an entire class of arms is also wrong and illegal, but the law isn't the law when you have power. :rolleyes:

So it's not as simple as filling out your forms, paying your tax stamp (which is also :rolleyes:). Having to pay an unreasonable $20,000 to $40,000 + due to the ban for firearms that all Americans are supposed to be able to own is government abuse. :America:

It sickening that there are dealers out there who profit from this, and look forward to new bans so they can make a $. I'd rather have all my firearms devalued and have Americans be as free as we should be than to have illegal legislation making my stuff worth $ and selling it for 5x the cost of something just because it is illegal.

[okie shooter]

CGSteve, I wont argue you point about cost, its up there, but again the orginal 200 dollar tax stamp was still not a law against buying them but as has been ruled a tax. I look back at a old copy of shotgun news, the cost between a transferable M-16 and a AR-15 wasnt much, I think a couple hundred more than an ar costs now. Just the transfer tax kept most of us from getting them.

Now who did this was the folks you voted for in dc.

[19Charlie_84]

A guy workin the gun counter at cabelas was talkin to me and said when he came back from Nam, he duct taped an AK to the outside of his duffel bag. He figured it would get stolen for sure and didnt really care. When his bag got all the way thru wherever they go and he rotated back to the states it was still there, full auto and taped to his bag. He said he still has it, now I dont know how true that is, my BS detector was going off but I agreed with him and laughed to make him feel better.

Another LT (who shall remain nameless) I ran into said he smuggled an AK back in the oil pan of his humvee from OIF 1. My BS detector was off the chart on that one (esp coming from this particular individual). What a mess that would be getting it in and out.

So could I have only the AK 4pc wooden stock set mailed back to the US? Its only parts, and parts that are legal in the US, or would it be at the commander's discresion?

[ScottD]

You cant bring much back at all. It depends on your unit. Infantry units are VERY strict. A buddy of mine was not even allowed to bring home a 1x1 piece of shrapnel that missed his head by an inch and stuck in a tree next to him. Pilots however, are sneaking stuff in their underbellies (CH-47 for example) and getting away with it. I keep telling my old chain of command to send me back a few AK's with their BBL's welded shut and the bolts welded closed, but somebody keeps figuring my plans out! :eek:

Seriously, its not like the old days. Sure, stuff is making it back, but the game is MUCH riskier than before.

[g3shooter1]

You could have her ask her CO as to whether he would allow the bringing back of mags and bayos.

I know a soldier who brought some bayos back.

He told me that you have to buy them at the bazaar and have a receipt. :(

[brewskzilla]

GEEZ... whatever happened to the good-old-days when you just stuffed it into your C-bag, packed your clothes and gear around it and hoped nobody noticed? They never did, and you got to take home a cool souveneer/unregistered firearm...

Ah... those were the days. I AM, however, glad I didn't get caught. And to think... I sold the bastard within a year. Russian AK... DAMN I was retarded back then.