[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by micromachine

Logistically, bringing the M1 Garand back would be tough. I suggest that it would be done for some of the reasons below:

a) Frees up the last stores of more modern weapons (Coast Guard, Naval Land detachments, Training battalions, etc.) for front line use.

b) Commercially available ammunition (Government purchase or confiscation).

c) One shot, one kill.

d) Lots of variants and parts available.

e) Semi automatic firepower for units that may lack it (State Militias and the like).

f) Cross compatibility with the M1895, M1903, M1917 rifle, M1917 mmg, M1918 bar, M1919mmg and the plethora of hunting rifles in this caliber.

g) Kalashnikov-esque ruggedness that has already been bought and paid for by Uncle Sam.

If given the choice, I would take an M1 Garand coming out of mothballs rather than some baffed out M16EZ, re-issued battlefield pickup, or some other abomination in a scarce sized caliber, particularly if based in CONUS. the only real drawbacks are the en-block clip availability, lack of skilled armorers and smiths, and the chance of getting the wrong ammo at the wrong time.

The issue would be NUMBERS. In the 90s, there were around 100K M1s in the US inventory, mostly as parade rifles or for the Civilian Marksmanship Program. Canada had roughly an equal number in the RCMP arsenal. There were more than 2 MILLION M16A1s in the US arsenal. So the US would most likely just issue M16A1s to those agencies that needed them.