Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation
Forbes ^ | 3/11/2013 | Ralph Benko

Posted on 03/11/2013 8:30:45 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota

The Denver Post, on February 15th, ran an Associated Press article entitled Homeland Security aims to buy 1.6b rounds of ammo, to far too little notice. It confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. As elsewhere reported, much of this purchase order is for rounds forbidden by international law for use in war plus a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending fewer than 6 million rounds a month. 1.6 billion rounds, therefore, would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America.

Add to this perplexingly outré purchase of ammo, DHS now is showing off its acquisition of heavily armored personnel carriers, repatriated from the Iraqi and Afghani theaters of operation. As observed by “paramilblogger” Ken Jorgustin last September:

(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: ammo; banglist; communism; communists; coup; dhs; dhsammo; dhsoutofcontrol; guncontrol; guntrol; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last
These reports have been on the blogosphere for some time. Interesting that Forbes is now picking them up.

It would be very interesting for one of our Congressional budget 'hawks' to run with this.

1 posted on 03/11/2013 8:30:45 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Would not surprise me if those budget hawks do just that.


2 posted on 03/11/2013 8:35:20 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Meanwhile, the civilian supply of ammo remains pitiful. Last weekend I went to check at a high-volume store, and there were only a handful of boxes of 5.56, limit two to a customer. A few surplus 7.62. No 9mm, 40 or 45 at all. No 22s. The only plentiful ammo was Russian 7.62x54R and shotshells.


3 posted on 03/11/2013 8:40:32 AM PDT by Sender (It's never too late to be who you could have been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security..."

The founding fathers would be shooting by now.

4 posted on 03/11/2013 8:41:03 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

“Interesting that Forbes is now picking them up”

Yes but notice he still can’t quite bring himself to identify the intent of all this. He still wants to think its just because govt is wasteful or silly.


5 posted on 03/11/2013 8:43:24 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

I can’t wait for the time, as is too often the case for large government purchases, that the bureaucrats decide they have too much ammo, and to save storage costs, they unload the surplus at great discounts.


6 posted on 03/11/2013 8:45:27 AM PDT by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Who is filling the order?


7 posted on 03/11/2013 8:48:53 AM PDT by Bogey78O (We had a good run. Coulda been great still.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O
Who is filling the order?

Question of the Year. Who IS filling those orders? The answer may explain why the "Big Boy" ammo companies have not joined the non-sales-to-the-government fight.

8 posted on 03/11/2013 8:51:30 AM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
Senator's Paul and or Cruz need to attach an Amendment to every piece of Gun Legislation prohibiting the Federal Government and or Law Enforcement form using "Hollow Point" ammo. I'd call my Senators, but I live in NJ so you know how far that would go.
9 posted on 03/11/2013 8:53:02 AM PDT by Falcon4.0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

I’m saving up for those good deals myself.


10 posted on 03/11/2013 8:54:58 AM PDT by NativeSon ( Grease the floor with Crisco when I dance the Disco)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Oh don’t be ridiculous John McCain told us it is “ridiculous” to even ask such questions. Just let them buy tons of ammo while they argue against guns. I’m sure it’s all for a good purpose and not for use in cafes.


11 posted on 03/11/2013 8:56:08 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O

What fraction is being filled by foreign manufacturers?


12 posted on 03/11/2013 8:56:57 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
Doesn't matter, in the last few months US citizens bought enough firepower to outfit the entire chinese and indian armies. And that’ just the stuff they know about. The feds are scared because they know they're out-manned and outgunned in most parts of the country. This isn't close quarter combat in a small country like Iraq or Afghanistan; tanks, drones, and urban combat training will do the feds no good. The simple fact is that the feds would have to go up against the largest standing army in the world, in their own backyard, and it would end badly for them. This is the only reason for all of the attacks on the 2nd amendment that are taking place now.
13 posted on 03/11/2013 8:57:43 AM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

“The Founding Fathers, would be shooting by now”...and well shot dead. The only person, who kept them, and this Great Nation alive- was Robert Rogers. You probably have never heard of him. Since, those he saved, languished him in obscurity, by unsecured debt and slander. You do not know the history of Our Country.


14 posted on 03/11/2013 9:02:47 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Falcon4.0

Cruz and Paul really cannot do everything, even if they wanted to.

Forbes is not an off the wall publication.

Perhaps you could tell your silly, corrupt NJ Senators that in case they hadn’t noticed, there is a new wave coming and it has the Constitution on it’s side, as well as young adults (who notice that 25% of their pay goes to Social Security that they will never see) and who rely on the internet and twitter feed to keep up with current events.


15 posted on 03/11/2013 9:05:57 AM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Funny how this isn’t affected by the sequestration.


16 posted on 03/11/2013 9:14:36 AM PDT by Boiling point (Socialism; Ideas so good they have to be mandatory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

I appreciate you telling me what you think I don’t know.


17 posted on 03/11/2013 9:15:26 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

I just posted on another thread about a dealer at a show I went to told me that this is just an internet conspiricy, no arguments allowed. He did have a good inventory including hollow points.


18 posted on 03/11/2013 9:17:49 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
Gentlemen and Ladies,

I think we are centered in the crosshairs of a psychotic Marxist regime.

To paraphrase the First Lady, “For the first time in my life, I am AFRAID of my country.”

19 posted on 03/11/2013 9:19:34 AM PDT by July4 (Remember the price paid for your freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sender

I find it interesting that .22 has all but vanished. The cheapest and most common caliber.


20 posted on 03/11/2013 9:19:56 AM PDT by Noumenon (One individual with courage, determination and a rifle can change the course of history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sender
Meanwhile, the civilian supply of ammo remains pitiful. Last weekend I went to check at a high-volume store, and there were only a handful of boxes of 5.56, limit two to a customer. A few surplus 7.62. No 9mm, 40 or 45 at all. No 22s. The only plentiful ammo was Russian 7.62x54R and shotshells.

When the time comes just remember that one well placed shot can net you several magazines full of ammo as well as a new rifle and a few odd personal effects assuming the boots fit.
21 posted on 03/11/2013 9:20:09 AM PDT by 762X51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 762X51
When the time comes just remember that one well placed shot can net you several magazines full of ammo as well as a new rifle and a few odd personal effects assuming the boots fit.

A time-honored technique. A ball-peen hammer'd do the job too. To the bold go the spoils...

22 posted on 03/11/2013 9:23:07 AM PDT by Noumenon (One individual with courage, determination and a rifle can change the course of history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

None of us today know what happened with Robert Rogers, since the truth about him is shrouded in mystery.

But to say to someone out of the blue that they don’t know the history of our country because they mentioned the founding fathers without specifically mentioning Robert Rogers is odd.

Nothing personal, it just seemed like an unnecessarily concentrated way to make a distantly related point.


23 posted on 03/11/2013 9:23:13 AM PDT by rlmorel (1793 French Jacobins and 2012 American Liberals have a lot in common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

I looked over Robert Rogers. What I’ve read shows an alcoholic, licentious miserable failure of a man.


24 posted on 03/11/2013 9:24:49 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

The only thing worthy of mention at all was his “Rules for Ranging”, and I don’t find it that groundbreaking of a treatise. Mostly common sense.


25 posted on 03/11/2013 9:26:31 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

I made this video the other day.

It is an expression of what is headed our way.

Police State USA , Life During Wartime

http://youtu.be/RYn9JF0TSgw

Let me know your thoughts.

Thanks


26 posted on 03/11/2013 9:27:13 AM PDT by Zeneta (No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Is this being done to drive up the cost of ammunition?


27 posted on 03/11/2013 9:30:27 AM PDT by jonrick46 (The opium of Communists: other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
Thank God Forbes is getting involved.

Someone needs to ask why DHS is investing in bullets that have been banned in wars - and why kevlar vest are becoming standard issue. Who the hell does DHS think they're going to be fighting?

The United States does have a military. Our military fights our wars. So who is DHS arming up for?

28 posted on 03/11/2013 9:32:24 AM PDT by GOPJ (DHS HAS secured: 1.6 BILLION bullets - 2.700 tanks and 35,000 drones ...to use on American soil...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Not only do they need the rounds, they need a multi-layered chain of loyalty in the military. Remeber Sadam’s guard divisions? Waffen SS?

Until the concentric circles of military loyalty form, I think the feds would have a hard time motivating them to fight militias.


29 posted on 03/11/2013 9:36:46 AM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

True. I once pointed out that the problems we are dealing with today are more egregeous than what the founding fathers dealt with 230+ years ago and we see how they solved it, yet some on our side today would call us “wacko nutjobs” to suggest that the tree of liberty might need watering again. Those same folks can readily be seen waving sparklers on the 4th of July celebrating something 230 years ago the now deam “crazy”.


30 posted on 03/11/2013 9:37:09 AM PDT by MachIV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

Well, spit it out then. Do you have something to say?


31 posted on 03/11/2013 9:49:42 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

DHS bump for later.....


32 posted on 03/11/2013 9:50:18 AM PDT by indthkr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Yes, he was worthless. No good. No account.


33 posted on 03/11/2013 9:51:22 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

In his later years maybe...


34 posted on 03/11/2013 9:51:41 AM PDT by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

At least, you took a look. Thank you.


35 posted on 03/11/2013 9:53:39 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

I’ve heard from a number of ammo dealers, that the new .22 rifles that people buy and pimp up, put a very large demand on the ammo.


36 posted on 03/11/2013 9:59:45 AM PDT by stuartcr ("I have habits that are older than the people telling me they're bad for me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck, it’s probably a ........

I am not some paranoid nutcase wearing warpaint, listening for black helicopters and living in a tarp tent far back in the woods, but I wouldn’t put ANYTHING past our present government.... ANYTHING.


37 posted on 03/11/2013 10:00:58 AM PDT by Gator113 ( ~just keep livin~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

Well since you asked, I think you’re an arrogant S.O.B. You, like many liberal elites, think that you are so much smarter than the common folk. It really is not worth my time or effort to engage you. Was that clear enough for you?


38 posted on 03/11/2013 10:02:02 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

If one tries to look at this logically, you have to ask the questions:

1.) Has the government ever made this type of non-military purchase before, in this volume?

2.) What is the given reason by the government for the purchase?

I don’t think it is any stretch that an anti-gun administration would push an agenda to limit gun ownership and usage by a variety of methods including:

a) Regulation of gun ownership
b) Regulation of gun manufacturers
c) Taxing of gun owners
d) Taxing of gun manufacturers
e) Regulation of ammo manufacturing
f) Taxing of ammo manufacturing
g) Regulation of gun and ammo sales
h) Taxing of gun and ammo sales
i) Creating scarcity of guns through artificially induced scarcity of raw materials
j) Creating scarcity of ammo through artificially induced scarcity of raw materials
k) Creating scarcity of guns through artificially induced scarcity of finished product
l) Creating scarcity of ammo through artificially induced scarcity of finished product

And any administration that would knowingly allow people to be killed by guns provided by the government to further their goals would shrink from spending a few hundreds of millions of dollars to buy up ammo to deprive gun owners the means to load their weapons.

This analysis does not even consider any more nefarious or conspiracy themes such as a nascent police state using henchmen of the current administration.

This analysis focuses completely on how liberals would look to restrict and remove our 2nd Amendment rights without having to enter the spotlight of “real” legislation or any amendments to the Constitution.


39 posted on 03/11/2013 10:10:18 AM PDT by rlmorel (1793 French Jacobins and 2012 American Liberals have a lot in common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Aside from the legitimate questions about the NEED for this amount of ammo for Homeland Security—what about the cost for 1.6 BILLION rounds?

Even with the savings that could be garnered from a large purchase, there is an irreducible minimum cost of production for manufacturers.

Has anyone figured out the cost of this purchase?


40 posted on 03/11/2013 10:10:54 AM PDT by wildbill (You're just jealous because the Voices talk only to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

You did engage. Swing and a miss.


41 posted on 03/11/2013 10:12:21 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler

No man is worthless, however. Even I have worth. I show what people should not do with their lives.


42 posted on 03/11/2013 10:29:25 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler
Hey, I'm always willing to learn something new. His treatise is at least distributed among current-day Rangers. So he has that going for him. Which is nice.

Though, must admit, the precepts I read through had some that were very dated.

43 posted on 03/11/2013 10:31:46 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

Hey, I’m an arrogant SOB. Don’t I get a mention?


44 posted on 03/11/2013 10:33:20 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
It is utterly inconceivable that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is planning a coup d’etat against President Obama, ...

The coup d’etat is already underway. It's in progress in Congress and state legislatures around the country.

45 posted on 03/11/2013 10:36:27 AM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sender

I have had fairly good luck finding .22LR, and a small amount of 5.56 (well, .223 really). Its been .308 that I cannot find for the life of me. Surplus 7.62 has dried up and commercial .308 is either extremely popular, or manufacturers have downgraded production numbers in favor of .223.


46 posted on 03/11/2013 10:40:04 AM PDT by AzSteven ("War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." Jean Dutourd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: factoryrat

Anyone wants to take on Fed forces via gunbattle is committing suicide. The only tactic that has proven effective against US troops is IED. Look how many LAPD cops were involve looking for one rogue cop with guns. Imagine what 100 Dorniers would do to the LAPD and CA LE. If 25 percent of the American people declared war against the Fed gov using assymmetric warfare, the US would be hardpressed to win unless it is willing to be absolutely ruthless. Problem with such reaction is overtime the US gov may end up with more people against her.


47 posted on 03/11/2013 10:43:40 AM PDT by Fee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2
Yes but notice he still can’t quite bring himself to identify the intent of all this. He still wants to think its just because govt is wasteful or silly.

Allowing your audience to come to its own conclusions is not a bad story telling device. People tend to believe things more strongly when they figure it out for themselves as opposed to being told what to think.

48 posted on 03/11/2013 10:44:53 AM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Every man is absolutely worthless. Maybe, R. Rogers was just goofin’ around. Probably not. No biggie.


49 posted on 03/11/2013 10:51:41 AM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: RedHeeler
Every man is absolutely worthless.

Incorrect. For even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.

However, even the quality of being absolutely worthless has a worth: One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject.

Ergo, even the absolutely worthless has worth.

Meaning it is not absolutely worthless.

Making the original premise: "One can deduce what absolute worthlessness looks like from observing the subject," meaningless.

Meaning that the subject IS in fact worthless.......


50 posted on 03/11/2013 11:15:47 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Republicans have the same policies as the Democrats, except for the part where they win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson