If I was on a battlefield with no arms but my Conan-Sword, I would desert!!

Maybe the officer just wasn’t firm with modern weapons and thought that a Conan-Sword must be state of the art if even Arnie uses it in films where they have all possibilities?! Arnie could have had an M16 or an F16 instead, be he had been given this tremendous sword!

Or he is a Star Wars fan. Remember what those Jedis destroyed with their light swords. Maybe he mixed up CONAN with CORUSCANT??!

It will remain a miracle to me ;-o!

Good luck

Frammi

So, German military under Hitler bred german shepard dogs and used them during the war. Animals bred for military use are specifically “modified” by breeding and selecting only those animals with certain characteristics. Different military forces still use dogs today, and other animals such as dolphins. Shouldn’t these be covered under the USML as well?

What about a kitchen knife that was used somewhere to commit some atrocity?

I think there is a limit to everything…

As for the comment from Mr. Carpenter that “U.S. servicemen as well as civilians lost their lives” and “To discount this dishonors their service”…. (sorry but) That gave me a chuckle..it sounds like something a politician would say to distract people — once they got “too rational” in reviewing the facts (a “logic bomb”, if you will). Not only is that a ridiculous exaggeration (as you have adeptly articulated some key differences) but it the specific kind of political/fear mongering-rhetoric that “keeps the madness going.” Anyway, Clif, thanks for (trying) to keep ‘em sane….

My point was that the “any modification” rule is overwhelming in its coverage and should be reined back to something more sensible. Quite honestly, in my opinion, shortened co-axial cables or a minor commercial electronic component with an extra lead wire attached and no other change is no more a reasonable munitions item than a mass produced movie replica.

I suspect that the previous commentor is correct; this is porbably merely a case of an enthusiastic but incompletely trained Customs Agent and a shipper with a sense of humor and access to his local paper’s OpEd submissions page.

ECCN 0A918.b controls bayonets.

I could find no ECCN for swords – barbarian or otherwise – nor could I find a hook in the USML.

I had a customs agent once call me to inform they intended to hold one of our EAR99, NLR exports because they recognized our “…company is a defense company and therefore this shipment must be subject to ITAR.”

My reaction of course was to clarify “must be subject to ITAR”, which luckily was resolved with some brochures and a conversation with the cutoms supervisor.

Overall, I think it is a good they are scrutinizing and ‘questioning” but our patience while customs agents learn on the job does have a limit…

The Marine ceremonial sabers could be considered “modified in form, fit, or function” for USMC use and thus fall under the ITAR in the same way that the 1/4 inch shortened coaxial cable of CNN fame does.

I doubt any modern military would choose to specifically design a “Conan-like” sword, however, so the Albion sword would still fall out of ITAR regs.

The Customs agent may have just enough information to be dangerous. I rather hope that this publicized incident promotes a little additional training.

I am, of course, happy that someone is reviewing what leaves the country, but they still need to abide by the law and detain only things that are export-controlled, and, at least as far as I can discern, swords aren’t on the USML or the CCL.

As to the machetes in Rwanda, over three-quarters were imported from China, so U.S. controls on machetes wouldn’t have had any effect. And many also used hoes to kill their fellow Rwandans, another item that I would be loathe to subject to export control.