Steyr pistols, Nazis and Insurgents

[cainxinth]

I’m considering buying a pistol. I don’t think I need one for protection and if I ever go hunting I’m sure I’d use a rifle. I’ll probably take it to the range a few times a year, but thats about it. Mostly, I’m purchasing it because I have a fetish for all things mechanical. After a bit of research an Austrian gun maker, Steyr, caught my eye. The M-A1 in particular. I like the look of the gun, I like the reviews of it I’ve read, I like the materials it’s made from, and the technology and craftsmanship behind it. The only thing I don’t like is that company from which it originates apparently has a pretty dirty past and a not so clean present. According to wikipedia:

During the World War II the Steyr-Daimler-Puch cartel used slave labour in the German concentration camps extensively, notably in the Mauthausen-Gusen camp complex at Gusen.

and

Steyr made international headlines when it sold 800 HS .50 long range sniper rifles to Iran in 2005, for the National Iranian Police Organisation to use against drug smugglers.

Forty-five days later, the first of several American soldiers was killed by, ostensibly, one of the exported weapons, and a number of the rifles were recovered in raids on Iraqi insurgents.

After reading that the only way I’m buying a Steyr is if I convince myself of two things. One, that the sins of the father aren’t passed to the son and the company and the people in it now have nothing whatsoever to do with their 20th century predecessors. And two, that they had every right to sell to Iran and that they can’t be held responsible for the actions of whoever put those weapons in the hands of insurgents.

What do you think?

[madmonk28]

I think the government of Iran has a history of supporting violence outside of its borders. It is not an issue of some weapons going astray, but of a government policy of securing weapons to be used outside of Iran.

I think anyone selling arms to Iran should have a reasonable expectation that the weapons in question could be used to either arm Hamas, or groups fighting in Iraq. I think the gun manufacturer likely does not care how the weapons are used as long as the sale is made.

I think that while you might not hold a firm responsible for actions that happened over 50 years ago, it is reasonable to hold a firm accountable for actions it took 3 years ago.

[madmonk28]

Missed the edit window, but wanted to add that in the interest of full disclosure, the author spent some time in Iraq, has had his workplace fired on by snipers, knows quite a few people killed in Iraq, many of whom were civilians simply going about their business, plus Chuck who was a really funny guy and never got to see his daughter, YMMV.

[Sevastopol]

@madmonk28

I think the government of Iran has a history of supporting violence outside of its borders. It is not an issue of some weapons going astray, but of a government policy of securing weapons to be used outside of Iran.

I think anyone selling arms to Iran should have a reasonable expectation that the weapons in question could be used to either arm Hamas, or groups fighting in Iraq. I think the gun manufacturer likely does not care how the weapons are used as long as the sale is made.

I think that while you might not hold a firm responsible for actions that happened over 50 years ago, it is reasonable to hold a firm accountable for actions it took 3 years ago.

Well, this is ambiguous on the ethical front, seeing as the OP only notes the sniper rifle having been used against legitimate military targets.

[Martini_Enfield]

@cainxinth

After reading that the only way I’m buying a Steyr is if I convince myself of two things. One, that the sins of the father aren’t passed to the son and the company and the people in it now have nothing whatsoever to do with their 20th century predecessors. And two, that they had every right to sell to Iran and that they can’t be held responsible for the actions of whoever put those weapons in the hands of insurgents.

What do you think?

I think you summed it up pretty well yourself right there.

Personally, I’m not a big fan of Steyr’s armaments, though- if we’re going for Modern, European handguns I’d take a Sig P226, a Browning Hi-Power, or an H&K USP over a Steyr handgun any day of the week.

[madmonk28]

@Sevastopol

Well, this is ambiguous on the ethical front, seeing as the OP only notes the sniper rifle having been used against legitimate military targets.

I assumed the OP found the idea of shooting American soldiers distasteful as he mentioned it as a possible reason not to purchase a weapon from the vendor.

[Quartz]

I think the OP should not immediately buy a Steyr and write to Steyr explaining why. I’d suggest the Iran angle is more relevant. Who knows, they may respond and explain the situation to his satisfaction.

[Wallenstein]

I presume on the latter issue that there can’t be (m)any weapons manufacturers who have not sold their products to less-than-savoury customers at some point in the last 30 yrs.

If that’s going to be the criteria by which you judge your purchase, you will really struggle to find a “clean” gun company.

[SamuelP]

Neat gun. Surprisingly light kick with .357 Sig; haven’t tried .40. Grip’s a little hard to get used to, and I don’t care for the trape sights. I would recommend the SIG P226 over the M-A1 but then again I would recommend the Sig over any handgun out there.