P08 DWM 1913 named

John Sabato · 12-16-2002, 02:02 PM

Doubs,

Not questioning your premise, just asking more questions about the theoretical origins of this pistol.

It is my understanding that Officers did not normally get issued pistols, but were required to purchase them out of their own funds... is it possible that they could do this by purchasing a government owned pistol through reimbursement?

This would explain the military characteristics of the pistol, and the fact that it was personally owned after it's government purchase.

Do you know of other examples where military hardware of the period could be "defaced" by personal engraving? The personal engraving of government owned equipment seems to be out of character for such a professional and disciplined force as Germany's pre-WWI Army.

Your thoughts?

12-16-2002, 02:02 PM	#14
John Sabato Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: The Capital of the Free World Posts: 10,155 Thanks: 3,003 Thanked 2,308 Times in 1,098 Posts	Doubs, Not questioning your premise, just asking more questions about the theoretical origins of this pistol. It is my understanding that Officers did not normally get issued pistols, but were required to purchase them out of their own funds... is it possible that they could do this by purchasing a government owned pistol through reimbursement? This would explain the military characteristics of the pistol, and the fact that it was personally owned after it's government purchase. Do you know of other examples where military hardware of the period could be "defaced" by personal engraving? The personal engraving of government owned equipment seems to be out of character for such a professional and disciplined force as Germany's pre-WWI Army. Your thoughts? __________________ regards, -John S "...We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created EQUAL *and are endowed by their Creator* with certain UNALIENABLE* rights, and among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness..."*