DHS Denies Ammo Purchases Aimed at Civilians

[Mtn.man]

Officials at the Department of Homeland Security denied Thursday that its large-scale ammunition purchases were an effort keep bullets out of the hands of private citizens.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/04/25/dhs-denies-ammo-purchases-aimed-at-civilians



But if a private citizen has a mere 1000 rounds he is considered a threat to society.

Double standard?

[BushMasterBoy]

Didn't you know the "double standard" is the rule of law.

[lowbeyond]

you know what they say about official denials....

[Dave_L]

What's next, if you have more than a week's supply of food you're considered a fat ass?

[Mtn.man]

What's next, if you have more than a week's supply of food you're considered a fat ass?

Bloomberg is already on that.

[RevTracy]

Only fools, liberals, and 10-year-old kids believe the DHS's statement. The fact that the DHS is buying (hoarding??) this much ammo is disconcerting on two levels: it is indeed the intention of the Obama administration to keep ammo out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, AND why does a "security" force need that much ammo when their sole purpose is to defend the homeland? There is no reason every DHS agent needs 1000 more rounds then soldiers fighting in Afghanistan! I'm glad some of our elected officials are finally questioning this.

I think it would only be fair if Congress forced the DHS to give away all of that excess ammo to the citizens...I wouldn't mind getting a few thousand rounds of 9mm or 5.56... [pick-me]

[Ridge]

Only fools, liberals, and 10-year-old kids believe the DHS's statement. The fact that the DHS is buying (hoarding??) this much ammo is disconcerting on two levels: it is indeed the intention of the Obama administration to keep ammo out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, AND why does a "security" force need that much ammo when their sole purpose is to defend the homeland? There is no reason every DHS agent needs 1000 more rounds then soldiers fighting in Afghanistan! I'm glad some of our elected officials are finally questioning this.

I think it would only be fair if Congress forced the DHS to give away all of that excess ammo to the citizens...I wouldn't mind getting a few thousand rounds of 9mm or 5.56... [pick-me]

Do you expect DHS to "defend the homeland" with good feelings and tupperware parties? And I guarantee you soldiers in Afghanistan are using 100x more ammo than any DHS personnel.

[Rucker61]

In peacetime, in my Corps level unit, we may have only fired 300 rounds per soldier per year, but I sure even the non-deployed combat units fire more than that these days. I saw this same story in a longer report on a different site, and the interesting takeaway there was a quote from DHS that said, in essence, "We buy a lot of rounds, in bulk, because we save money that way". If that's a good enough reason for the government, it should good enough for the citizens.

[CroiDhubh]

Didn't bring my tin-foil hat...

[Great-Kazoo]

Only fools, liberals, and 10-year-old kids believe the DHS's statement. The fact that the DHS is buying (hoarding??) this much ammo is disconcerting on two levels: it is indeed the intention of the Obama administration to keep ammo out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, AND why does a "security" force need that much ammo when their sole purpose is to defend the homeland? There is no reason every DHS agent needs 1000 more rounds then soldiers fighting in Afghanistan! I'm glad some of our elected officials are finally questioning this.

I think it would only be fair if Congress forced the DHS to give away all of that excess ammo to the citizens...I wouldn't mind getting a few thousand rounds of 9mm or 5.56... [pick-me]

I bet if you link this thread up with this other one some of you would have an answer. Since you're a newer member i will also "guess" you have not figured out the SEARCH FUNCTION icon yet.
http://www.ar-15.co/threads/100923-Obama-Caused-This-Ammo-Shortage

[RevTracy]

Do you expect DHS to "defend the homeland" with good feelings and tupperware parties? And I guarantee you soldiers in Afghanistan are using 100x more ammo than any DHS personnel.

First, I am not a conspiracy fearing, tin-foil hat wearing person. I do find certain aspects of our current leadership in D.C. disconcerting to say the least. Second, I make my judgments based on facts and empirical data. Given the amount of ammo ordered by DHS divided by the number of reported agents indicates they are ordering a large amount of ammo per agent. Do they need plenty of ammo?? Of course...but one has to wonder why, given there aren't too many examples of all-out gun battles with insurgents in the streets of the U.S. , they need as many rounds as ordered. Also, I am not saying that the DHS is entirely responsible for the current ammo shortage. Case in point: .22 ammo. There are about 1.2 billion rounds of .22 LR manufactured in the U.S. per year. Given that DHS does not use that ammo, the only reasonable conclusion that there is a shortage of .22 ammo is that the public is in a buying frenzy. That buying frenzy is, no doubt, fueled by fear generated by the all-out assault on our second amendment rights. And another point; unless you have recently served or are serving in Afghanistan it is very difficult for you to "guarantee" anything about what our soldiers have.

[RevTracy]

I bet if you link this thread up with this other one some of you would have an answer. Since you're a newer member i will also "guess" you have not figured out the SEARCH FUNCTION icon yet.
http://www.ar-15.co/threads/100923-Obama-Caused-This-Ammo-Shortage

Thank you for the link. Although I am a newer member to this forum I assure you I know how to use the search function. I am a longtime member of several other forums and have run my own site in the past...if I was looking for more posts on this topic I certainly would use the search function. I only made a comment to this thread because it was relevant to a discussion I heard on the radio the day before.

[wctriumph]

After you read the rather short article, scroll down and check out the gun control cartoon link, it will probably make you a little mad and a little sick. The misrepresentations really show the hippocrites for what they are.

[Byte Stryke]

Sooo, if DHS is not buying all of this for domestic use, why isn't it all FMJ?

[lead_magnet]

They claim to need 1,000 rounds per officer to become proficient? I didn't even shoot 700 rounds in instructor school... cute.

[sroz]

It's called an IDIQ contract. Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity. The USG issues these all the time for all kinds if purchases. Most of the time they never reach the quantities or dollar values contracted for. It is not unusual for them to issue these for 1,000,000 widgets at a cost of $2 each with a potential value of $2,000,000. Then at contract close-out they have purchased only 100,000 for a total of $200,000.

I'll save my tin foil for now.

[centrarchidae]

They claim to need 1,000 rounds per officer to become proficient? I didn't even shoot 700 rounds in instructor school... cute.

Colorado POST academies will run through 1500-5000/student, depending upon the academy.

Was that 700 rounds that you shot, to take you from "proficient" to "instructor," or from "zero" to "instructor?" My last instructor school was low round count, but was focused on teaching methods more than on developing my own skills, on the assumption that we were already competent.

Oh, and what sroz said. I think someone on LF already demolished this whole story just from Alex Jones screwing up the math.

[cofi]

They claim to need 1,000 rounds per officer to become proficient? I didn't even shoot 700 rounds in instructor school... cute.

well according to them

"DHS agents and officers need extensive training because they are "exposed to a variety of situations" and "only have that weapon to protect their lives," Medina said. "They can't contact air support [like an officer in an army could.] They have to be proficient at a very high level.""

i mean you cops can call in A-10s and artillery and stuff why would you guys need ammo for training

[Madusa]

I bet the dems. get a financial kick back for the order.

[TDYRanger]

What need to start happening is American ammo manufacturers need to curb sales they accept from DHS. Figure out that they are trying to shut them down in the long and need to stand up.

[Chad4000]

Sooo, if DHS is not buying all of this for domestic use, why isn't it all FMJ?


totally agree..........

[mtnhack]

What need to start happening is American ammo manufacturers need to curb sales they accept from DHS. Figure out that they are trying to shut them down in the long and need to stand up.The possible problem with this is that their licenses would promptly be revoked. I believe the ammunitions manufacturers are at the mercy of the government.
If I am incorrect in this, someone please set me straight.

[CroiDhubh]

The problem is, contracts are filled for most of the rounds, but they are buying even more.




Sooo, if DHS is not buying all of this for domestic use, why isn't it all FMJ?
Totally agree..........

Because modern ballistics on PP ammo are now comparable to FMJ and there's a slow switch over.


What need to start happening is American ammo manufacturers need to curb sales they accept from DHS. Figure out that they are trying to shut them down in the long and need to stand up.
They make way too much to do that.

[losttrail]

Only fools, liberals, and 10-year-old kids believe the DHS's statement. The fact that the DHS is buying (hoarding??) this much ammo is disconcerting on two levels: it is indeed the intention of the Obama administration to keep ammo out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, AND why does a "security" force need that much ammo when their sole purpose is to defend the homeland? There is no reason every DHS agent needs 1000 more rounds then soldiers fighting in Afghanistan! I'm glad some of our elected officials are finally questioning this.

I think it would only be fair if Congress forced the DHS to give away all of that excess ammo to the citizens...I wouldn't mind getting a few thousand rounds of 9mm or 5.56... [pick-me]

Lets not forget about the 7,000 select fire "personal defense weapons" which ARE "guns for the battlefield".

Which battlefield will DHS be deployed to? When?

[Chad4000]

The problem is, contracts are filled for most of the rounds, but they are buying even more.




Because modern ballistics on PP ammo are now comparable to FMJ and there's a slow switch over.


They make way too much to do that.

K, i dont have time to look for the stories right now, but I read that it was all hollow point ammo. I also seem to remember that hollow points are against the geneva convention... (again, dont have time right now to verifty, so correct me if im wrong)

[CroiDhubh]

K, i dont have time to look for the stories right now, but I read that it was all hollow point ammo. I also seem to remember that hollow points are against the geneva convention... (again, dont have time right now to verifty, so correct me if im wrong)

The Geneva Accord only deals with attacks on foreign soils and when used in the convention of war. It has nothing to do with the DHS other than that. This is why cops carry HST, HP, and Frangible. Hell, even Air Marshals carry frangible. The DHS can use whatever they see fit in order to defend our shores on our shores.

[Chad4000]

The Geneva Accord only deals with attacks on foreign soils and when used in the convention of war. It has nothing to do with the DHS other than that. This is why cops carry HST, HP, and Frangible. Hell, even Air Marshals carry frangible. The DHS can use whatever they see fit in order to defend our shores on our shores.


gotcha.... so if we were being attacked on our soil, by another uniformed military, we dont have to follow geneva....but if we go somewhere and attack then we do?

still not super comfortable with the government buying ammo that it's not allowed to use in war........ doesnt seem like there are many reasons why you would need it other then bad ones. unless they are worried about an invading army, (hence being able to use hollow points) in which case, you would want your citizens to have AR's and mags lol

[CroiDhubh]

Well, not exactly. The only people who have to follow the Geneva Accord are 1.)Those who agreed to it and 2.)Uniformed military.

I agree with the second part of your post.

[Chad4000]

Well, not exactly. The only people who have to follow the Geneva Accord are 1.)Those who agreed to it and 2.)Uniformed military.

.

right...which we would be on our soil or not right?

[Chad4000]

^^ I should say that i am just trying to understand...reread my last post and it sounds argumentative lol

[clublights]

DHS are LEO not .mil ..

The Geneva Accords have ZERO effect on them.

I don't know of a LEO that has Carried FMJ in the last 30 years or more.. I'm only 38 but I honestly don't recall em ever not using Hollow point ammo ( at least once I was old enough to know the difference)

[Rucker61]

DHS has Immigration, Border Patrol, Coast Guard and the Secret Service under it, and they typically fight criminals, not opposing uniformed forces whose countries are signatories to the Hague and Geneva conventions. We can legally use non-FMJ rounds against terrorists and criminals. It makes sense that they would buy JHP ammo, to use against their expected enemies and to train with what they use. Now, the amount they're buying I'm skeptical about.

[Chad4000]

DHS are LEO not .mil ..

The Geneva Accords have ZERO effect on them.

I don't know of a LEO that has Carried FMJ in the last 30 years or more.. I'm only 38 but I honestly don't recall em ever not using Hollow point ammo ( at least once I was old enough to know the difference)

right.. Im with you on that. my main thought is that they are buying ammo that they specifically cant use on anyone but civilians....

[clublights]

right.. Im with you on that. my main thought is that they are buying ammo that they specifically cant use on anyone but civilians....

Drop the "civilians" and replace with these words :
Terrorists
Murderers
Rapists
Criminals

They carry it for they exact same reason you do
It's more effective.

[Chad4000]

Drop the "civilians" and replace with these words :
Terrorists
Murderers
Rapists
Criminals

They carry it for they exact same reason you do
It's more effective.

um..... we arent allowed to use JHP against terrorists over seas.. but fine.

oh, and I HOPE that they are buying a billion rounds of JHP ammo that specifically cant be used anywhere but here on our streets, for the "same reason I do"....

[clublights]

um..... we arent allowed to use JHP against terrorists over seas.. but fine.



Actually yes they can . Terrorists are unlawful combatants and are not given protection under the geneva accords.

How you think we can stick them in Gitmo ?

[Chad4000]

Actually yes they can . Terrorists are unlawful combatants and are not given protection under the geneva accords.



then why arent we?

[clublights]

then why arent we?

I dunno if the .mil is or is not

But I'd bet that the rank and file infantry will never use JHP's .... now some of the special forces.. attacking a specific target are much more likely to be using them.. and you'd never hear about it. ( like it would not surprise me to find out Osama ate JHP's to the face)

[Chad4000]

^^ Im about 90% sure we arent.. the reasons that I always heard were the geneva conventions. and yeah, I know that terrorists dont count.. I could be wrong.

[Aloha_Shooter]

The problem with issuing JHPs for use against terrorists is that you can never control whether your next encounter will definitely be against unlawful combatants. It creates yet another logistical burden (as well as legal trap) to track yet another type of ammo. By not stocking JHPs, the military can state emphatically that none of the wounds in a claimed collateral damage encounter are the result of "ammunition designed to maim or cause undue suffering". No one caught with suspect ammo can claim it was issued to him/her by mistake.

[clublights]

The problem with issuing JHPs for use against terrorists is that you can never control whether your next encounter will definitely be against unlawful combatants. It creates yet another logistical burden (as well as legal trap) to track yet another type of ammo. By not stocking JHPs, the military can state emphatically that none of the wounds in a claimed collateral damage encounter are the result of "ammunition designed to maim or cause undue suffering". No one caught with suspect ammo can claim it was issued to him/her by mistake.


That is why I don't think you would ever see JHP in the hands of the rank and file Infantry.... but during a mission like the Osama raid.... sure. I could see Team 6 rolling in there with hollow points.

[cofi]

we are getting around it

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/

[Dingo]

^^Pshaw.... nothing exciting. The Russians have been doing it for years with the 5.45 :-)^^

[Gman]

GAO Now Investigating DHS Ammo Purchases (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/04/29/gao-now-investigating-dhs-ammo-purchases)


The congressional investigative agency is jumping into the fray just as legislation was introduced in both the Senate and the House to restrict the purchase of ammo by some government agencies (except the Department of Defense). The AMMO Act, (http://www.inhofe.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/inhofe-lucas-introduce-bill-limiting-federal-agencies-from-stockpiling-ammunition) introduced Friday, would prevent agencies from buying more ammunition if "stockpiles" are greater than what they were in previous administrations.

Donelle Harder, a spokeswoman for Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., who introduced the legislation in the Senate, tells Whispers the bill would also require GAO to share the findings of its report on DHS purchases with Congress.

[cofi]

GAO Now Investigating DHS Ammo Purchases (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/04/29/gao-now-investigating-dhs-ammo-purchases)
any chances of the ammo act passing?

[CroiDhubh]

Here it is from the horses mouth...at least ATK's horse:

http://www.federalpremium.com/downloads/company/13-CustomerLetter_FINAL.pdf