Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Homeland "Security" for Whom?

Interesting numbers here.

...In the war in Iraq, our military forces expended approximately 70 million rounds per year. In March DHS ordered 750 million rounds of hollow point ammunition. It then turned around and ordered an additional 750 million rounds of miscellaneous bullets including some that are capable of penetrating walls. This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen. Is this something we and the Congress should be concerned about?

Department of Homeland Security?  You mean the airport granny-grabbers plus INS plus Border Patrol?  The Department of Napolitano?

Buy.  More.  Ammo.


  1. Most of these ammunition purchases are entirely routine; although it may be problematic that nearly every Federal agency has a police force with investigation and arrest powers, it's true that even the Social Security Administration has one (with nearly 300 special agents), so that's about 600 rounds per agent. They've got to train, recertify (I think that's quarterly for all armed Federal police agents), etc.

    So a purchase of 174,000 rounds isn't a big shock even for Social Security.

    And as for them being hollow-points, well, it's true that the Geneva Conventions forbid this for military forces operating against other military forces; but they're authorized for pretty much every law enforcement agency, and for good reason. They don't tend to overpenetrate, which limits the dangers of ricochets and the guy down the block. Since policemen who do discharge their weapons usually work in crowded cities, this is a good thing.

    One of our Georgia lawmakers looked into the math for the NRA/ILA, and says that the DHS order of 450 million (which is to be filled over five years) actually works out to about double the ammo per agent per year as the SSA... but that's not completely shocking, since SSA thinks of itself as a quiet and mild mannered agency focused on helping the old and the disabled, while DHS thinks of itself as a Security force. They probably expect you to put in more range time.

    Now one thing that I do find strange is that DHS has also ordered a supply of .223 ammunition, and has redacted the quantities they are ordering from the official posting. I'm not sure what is up with that. Generally that information would not be hidden from the public.

    It could be that they're reacting to the current concerns in the press and Congress, though. In any case, the contract award amount is for less than five million dollars, so the figure can't be more than about fifteen million rounds (divided among about 65,000 agents). That comes to about 230 rounds per agent, although probably not every DHS agent has to qualify on a rifle.

  2. Buy. More. Ammo.

    I've figured it out. Either the feds are trying to crowd you guys out of the ammo market or they are getting their supplies before you all deplete the market.

  3. Saint Revolution8/24/2012 2:07 AM

    "...is this something we and the Congress should be concerned about?..."

    ...you really need to ask?!

    Grim: explaining away the inexplicable...

    The TRUTH:
    There are NO accurate counts of registered and unregistered guns in the US but general concensus assumes there are over ~300MM to ~350MM REGISTERED guns alone in the US. That number does NOT include unregistered, illegal, and underground guns and gun sales. That is one REGISTERED gun for every US citizen.
    U.S. Most Armed Country...
    How Many Guns Are In The United States Of America?
    How Many U.S. Adults Have How Many Guns?

    Guesstimates range from ~60MM to ~80MM households in USA have at least one gun.

    ...and, so...

    ...don't bullshit me with explanations of practice and quarterly certification.

    The bullshit DHS is worried about trouble at and post the November election(s)...and DHS THINK they are ready to act against their own citizens. DHS could give a shit and care less. DHS is an Enemy Of The TRUE State...just like most other bullshit government agencies stealing our money, enriching themselves, and holding the US citizen taxpayer in complete contempt.

    ...and what the fuck do we need police forces in almost every government agency for?!

    This fucking government is completely broken and out of control...and reckoning is coming...

    ...and that's what's REALLY going on.

    ...and OUR TAXES are buying their ammunition.

    As I have written numerous times in the past, the TRUE definition of taxes: forced subsidization of your own demise.

  4. Saint Revolution8/24/2012 2:16 AM

    Normally I loathe and despise Jim "kill-the-unborn" and all his bullshit liberal rhetoric ilkkkkkk.

    But, this time, he does actually POSSIBLY have a point...

    (Keep it in your pants, Jim. Daddy's NOT giving you a compliment...and no one wants you to procreate...)

  5. First of all, I'm not in the bullshit business. As I was just explaining the other day, I'm in the horseshit business.

    Secondly, there is an explanation of some sort. Crowding us out of the ammo market is a possible explanation; raising the price of energy has been a hallmark of the Obama administration's drive to force Americans to buy cars that are more fuel-efficient. Raising the price of ammunition by reducing supply v. the heightened demand could be a means of trying to wean Americans off shooting.

    The best way to test that hypothesis would be to examine ammunition purchases from these agencies from previous years. Are they up, and if they are up, by how much? If the proffered explanation of 'normal use' is accurate, the figure should be largely flat from, say, 2006-2012.

    If you want to know if you're really facing an escalation, that's how you can find out.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. There is no "danger" of me procreating.

  8. Saint Revolution8/25/2012 7:55 AM

    TO: Grim 8/24/2012 1:10 PM:

    I agree. I simply do NOT believe this ammo is/was purchased for training and standard inventory. One can only "crunch" numbers relative to the TRUTH and validity of the numbers available to one...and how much one trusts those numbers to be accurate. With government, my trust is somewheres around, euphemistically, absolute zero.

    TO: Jim 8/23/2012 12:53 PM:

    There you go. The beginnings of the proof of your postulate. I don't know if your written positing was serious or sarcasm...irrelevant at this point considering it is possible...