JFK’s M1 Garand to be Auctioned, Expected to Fetch $100k


President John F. Kennedy was one of the most prominent we’ve had. He navigated us through the beginning of the Cold War, set us on course to head to the moon, and his assassination kicked off the gun control era that we are still fighting today. Like every red blooded American should, Kennedy purchased an M1 Garand back when he was still a senator. Kennedy’s M1 Garand – hand-picked and breathed on by Army gunsmiths – is coming up for auction over at the Rock Island Auction company. Expected sale price: about $100,000. While that’s cool, that’s not the only interesting thing about this story . . .

The Daily Mail ran a article about this auction, and I just want to point out this gem in their coverage:

Just two years later he was gunned down by Oswald while travelling through Dallas, Texas, in an open-top car.

Oswald used a Carcano rifle, not dissimilar to Kennedy’s own Garand M1. Kennedy died from his wounds.

Naturally, the Daily Mail couldn’t help themselves. They had to point out the apparent irony that gun-owning JFK was killed by…a gun. What irks me is their use of the phrase “not dissimilar” when comparing the Carcano and the Garand. That’s like saying an elephant and an armadillo are “not dissimilar.” They’re both four-legged mammals, but that’s where the similarities end. It’s like saying that a Ferrarri 458 and a Ford Focus are “not dissimilar.”

Another article obviously written by someone who doesn’t know the first thing about guns. It’s pretty much what can you expect from an English reporter. An most American journalists, too.


  1. avatar Pantera Vazquez says:

    He died couple months after my birthdate. Be nice to have wherewithal to make a bid on THAT rifle…..

  2. avatar Rokurota says:

    The Carcano and Garand also faced off against one another during WW2. But yeah, there ain’t no connection.

    Also JFK was an NRA life member. Democrats have changed.

    1. avatar JWM says:

      Democrats have changed. Can’t stress that enough. WV of my youth was a solid democrat state. I identify more with the pre 68 democrat party than I do the Halliburton GOP.

      But in 68 I felt as tho the dems stabed me in the back and their behaviour since has turned me further away. I mostly don’t like the gop. But they do support gun rights. Mostly.

      My regret about jfk, outside of his untimely murder, was that apparently he was beginning to smell the coffee about viet nam. People have speculated that he would have scaled back or even stopped American involvement there.

      We could have had a different country had he lived.

      1. avatar JoshinGA says:

        The current GOP wouldnt be so bad if they weren’t trying to make our government a theocracy. The current democrats wouldnt be so bad if they didnt despise guns with every ounce of their being.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          That’s just silly. Try again.

        2. avatar John L. says:

          Actually i think he has something there.

          If you are a financial conservative (ie don’t spend what you don’t have), social liberal (ie stay out of people’s lives as much as possible), there’s really not a good fit out there. Unfortunately.

        3. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Don’t spend what you don’t have and stay out of people’s lives as much as possible? Sounds pretty much like the libertarian philosophy to me.

        4. avatar Colt Magnum says:

          Yes, it is a quandary. Too bad Pat Paulsen has passed away.

        5. avatar Cliff H says:


          Okay, one more time-

          The Democrats are HOPEless
          The Republicans are feckless
          The Tea Party gives a feck.

          Just sayin’.

        6. avatar Accur81 says:

          The Democrats would still favor big government and be almost as full of sh!t if they didn’t also want to ban guns. Further, this nation was founded and was wildly successful due in no small part to our Founding Father’s Christian influence.

        7. avatar doesky2 says:

          While everyone on this thread can quickly list dozens of major and important aspects of life that have tilted to the Left since JFK I’d like you to come up with just one significant aspect of society that has tilted to the Right since JFK.

          You theocracy comment is simply parroting your Leftist professor you F’ing tool.

        8. avatar Anon in CT says:

          Of course, the Dems have now decided that they want to regulate s3x too. That’s what the whole fake-crisis about a campus [email protected] epedemic is about. They may want regulations that are different than those desired by the SoCon wing of the GOP, but they also want government in bed with you. Honestly, it’s the Shamnesty-loving Chamber of Commerce wing of the GOP that irks me the most.

        9. avatar doesky2 says:

          The current GOP … trying to make our government a theocracy

          @anon in CT
          Isn’t it delicious how the Left always screamed about “keep your laws out of our bedroom” and yet we are watching leftist universities fall over each other in trying to force “sex contracts” on their students.

          As always from the Left, their accusations and slander against the right is typically pure projection.

        10. avatar Tim C says:

          That’s me. Financially conservative, socially liberal to the point of seeing merit in Rand Paul’s libertarian positional. And an NRA member, Calvin’s and FPCsupporter. Not much to chose from for those running in CA.

      2. avatar BLAMMO says:

        JFK had more in common with President Reagan than almost any Republican around today.

        1. avatar BLAMMO says:

          BTW, that’s a drool-worthy rifle by it’s own right. I’ve never seen a Garand with a polished blue finish and a high gloss stock. Some good info here about that vintage National Match rifle. Scroll down.


      3. avatar alanstorm says:

        ” People have speculated that he would have scaled back or even stopped American involvement there.”

        ? Not buying this, seeing how he’s the one who got us INTO Vietnam.

        1. avatar JWM says:

          My understanding is that once he got us more involved in viet nam, our involvement there actually started during ww2, he was rapidly losing any hope of saving the south vietnamese from themselves.

          What he may or may not have done was cut short by his death. After that, lbj doubled down and went full retard in vn.

    2. avatar nynemillameetuh says:

      It’s not easy being socially conservative and economically liberal. Where’s my party now that the Democrats turned into an anti-White, communist, and grievance party?

  3. avatar Ralph says:

    JFK’s cigar humidor sold for $575,000 (including the buyer’s premium) in 1996, so $100K for a nice Garand seems like a bargain.

  4. avatar Gs650g says:

    Is it properly registered with relevant authorities ?

    1. avatar ShiningKnight says:


  5. avatar Orvis says:

    Nice pristine M1! Makes me wonder if JFK ever took it to the range.

    1. avatar JWM says:

      If he did it’s likely that an expert armorer detailed it after every shoot.

  6. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Gotta wonder how WWII would have gone if we were using bolt action rifles.

    1. avatar JWM says:

      The Russians were using bolt action rifles and the red army accounted for 3 out of every 4 German casualties.

      Standard infantry rifles only really matter, in the greater scheme of things, to the individual soldier.

      Artillery, armor, aircraft, ships etc. matter much more.

      And manufacturing, supply and logistics trumps them all.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        And the Infantry only matters to those that want to WIN a war.

        manufacturing, supply and logistics for the russian commies all was provided by the US taxpayer – raw materials, machine tools, and finished goods. In particular trucks. Without the Studebaker 6×6 the Russian army would have ceased to exist..

    2. avatar Stinkeye says:

      The Allies still would have won, in substantially the same timeframe and manner. One or two battles might have come out differently, but the writing was on the wall by mid-’42. The only way it could have ended differently is if Germany or Japan developed the A-bomb before we did. The resources and manpower that the U.S. and Soviet Union could bring to bear on the war effort simply dwarfed anything that Germany and Japan were capable of producing.

      1. avatar juliesa says:

        Yes, and Germany and Japan ran out of oil too.

      2. avatar Chipsa says:

        Even if Germany or Japan did have a bomb, they had no way to effectively deliver it to the US. Meanwhile, even if England was knocked out of the way, the US was developing the Magnesium Overcast (aka B-36), the first intercontinental bomber. It only lasted 13 years in service, but would have been fully capable of delivering instant sunrise to anywhere in Japan or Germany from bases in the US.

      3. avatar Galtha58 says:

        @Stinkeye: Rather ironic that some of the Jews that left Germany because they were fleeing the Nazi philosophy ended up making the atomic bomb that finally ended the war with Japan.

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Yet another in the long list of Hitler’s strategic mistakes. Had he cooled it with the anti-Jew nonsense, Germany might have retained enough high-level scientific brains to get somewhere with their atomic bomb program, and potentially given him a weapon that could have at least given Germany a chance at winning the war.

  7. avatar JoshinGA says:

    Only 100K for a pristine Garand surely souped up by those Army gunsmiths, and owned by a president? Sounds like a steal to me. Too bad I havent made my fortunes yet.

  8. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Thinking 100K is a lowball estimate somehow. What a piece of Americana.

  9. avatar DamDoc says:

    The author is not dissimilar to Piers Morgan..

  10. avatar tfunk says:

    That weapon of war has no place on our streets

    1. avatar Craig says:

      Nah, Safari gun. Could be less than a H&H.

      Oh and your comment is wrong.

      1. avatar tfunk says:

        My comment was made in jest 🙂

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      …because it doesn’t fit in a holster or accept box magazines?

    3. avatar Richard in WA says:

      I said much the same after buying a Mosin-Nagant M91/30 in a drug store parking lot.

    4. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      It’s not black, has no barrel shroud, no vertical foregrip, no pistol grip, no adjustable stock, no detachable magazine, and only holds eight rounds.

      It’s obviously not a military gun. Looks more like a harmless hunting rifle to me.

      1. avatar AnOregonian says:

        Despite all that the President still issued an executive order demonizing them and preventing surplus rifles from being repatriated so people like you and I could purchase examples like JFK’s for reasonable prices.

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          I doubt many of those shot-out, stored-in-a-crate-for-forty-years M1’s from Korea would have been “examples like JFK’s”. 🙂

          Still, it would’ve been really nice to see them hit the market and maybe bring the current prices down a bit. And your point stands that there was absolutely no reason for the president to keep those rifles from being sold here, other than for him to score some cheap points with his political base.

  11. avatar anonymous says:

    Not safe for work…

  12. avatar Chipsa says:

    The Daily Mail is not dissimilar to a used piece of toilet paper. After all, they’re both bits of paper with shit on them…

  13. avatar Paelorian says:

    How much for the infamous mail-order Carcano?

  14. avatar JJ48 says:

    “Like every red blooded American should, Kennedy purchased an M1 Garand back when he was still a senator”

    I, for one, plan to get one without waiting until I become a senator, even if that goes against what a red-blooded American “should” do.

  15. avatar Navybat says:

    I love how this hack gun blogger Greenhorn writes about…poor writing.

    Kennedy “navigated us through the beginning of the Cold War”?????
    The Cold War started in 1947. Kennedy didn’t become President until 1961. He didn’t even become a Senator until 1953. So you’re telling us as a junior Representative in 1947 he was “navigating” us?

    At least the Daily Mail speaks “English”. “An (sic) most American journalists, too.” That’s the best you can do, Greenhorn?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email