1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security?

1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation

Quote:

---

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

---

Read the full story in Forbes

Some people see a ominous connection ?

In the last few years Billions have been spent on Americas private "Interior Airstrips" - much of that tax funded monies were earmarked for "Homeland Security" ???????

Small Airports Get Big Subsidies From Travelers' Taxes


The federal government has taken billions of dollars from the taxes and fees paid by airline passengers every time they fly and awarded it to small airports used mainly by private pilots and globe-trotting corporate executives.

Some of these "general aviation" facilities used the federal dollars for enhancements such as longer runways and passenger terminals aimed at luring traffic, an Associated Press review has found. And the money comes with little oversight, and at the expense of an increasingly beleaguered air transportation system.

"They're making out like bandits," said Bob Poole, director of transportation studies at Southern California's Reason Foundation and author of several studies on air transportation costs. "It's not only that airline passengers are paying more than their fair share, but they're being overtaxed to give private jets a free ride."

Passengers pay as many as six separate taxes and fees on a single airline ticket, adding up to more than $104 billion since 1997, the AP found. Yet these assessments often are overlooked by the millions who click the "buy" button to purchase tickets online, even though they can exceed 25% of the total airfare

Hey Bob, this thread is calling you....:)

Naaaa. I explained it once.





b.b.

It is NOT a purchase of 1.6 Billion rounds. It is a purchase requisition saying the US government wants to purchase ammo with a cap of UP TO 1.6 Billion rounds. This means they can put in a series of small orders as needed without having to go through the additional contracting (and costs) associated with re-competing and re-awarding a bid to a new contractor required by federal law. It is a mechanism of spending less money and eliminating waste.

Could the IDIQ have a smaller maximum value? Probably. There is no story here.

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

This looks like Obama's private Army needs ammo. With his agenda to disarm the evil American public. Why is there no public discussion about this threat to our freedom?

OH MY GOD! Not only am I carrying illegal 12 round magazines in my P2000, but they are filled with internationally forbidden hollow point ammunition.










(putz)



b.b.

Your one of "Them" so its OK!

(Arrogant)

Although people like Bob do not find this thread disturbing, What I find extremely disturbing is why Homeland Security refuses to answer questions by congress as to
why amount of ammo was procured, in addition to 2,700 APC's

Does anyone else find this a little bit troubling? Is the government trying to cause paranoia because they seem to be doing a good job of it.

GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS BEST WHEN THEY ARE AFRAID OF THEIR PEOPLE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BorderBob

OH MY GOD! Not only am I carrying illegal 12 round magazines in my P2000, but they are filled with internationally forbidden hollow point ammunition.




(putz)





b.b.

---

Yeah, I cross the Niagara river into the US all the time at night in my inflatable raft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Save Us

Although people like Bob do not find this thread disturbing, What I find extremely disturbing is why Homeland Security refuses to answer questions by congress as to
why amount of ammo was procured, in addition to 2,700 APC's

Does anyone else find this a little bit troubling? Is the government trying to cause paranoia because they seem to be doing a good job of it.

GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS BEST WHEN THEY ARE AFRAID OF THEIR PEOPLE.

---

The 2700 APC's were purchased for The Marines.

The ammunition purchase is an open-ended order for the future. They didn't take delivery of 1.6 Billion rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Save Us

Although people like Bob do not find this thread disturbing, What I find extremely disturbing is why Homeland Security refuses to answer questions by congress as to
why amount of ammo was procured, in addition to 2,700 APC's

Does anyone else find this a little bit troubling?

---

Yes I do!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mindcrime

The 2700 APC's were purchased for The Marines.

The ammunition purchase is an open-ended order for the future. They didn't take delivery of 1.6 Billion rounds.

---

Purchased, requisitioned, ordered,, It is a concern
I read the APC's were for HSA
There have been no answers from the department to Congress.

Why are we spending money for that magnitude of munitions???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Save Us

Purchased, requisitioned, ordered,, It is a concern
I read the APC's were for HSA
There have been no answers from the department to Congress.

---

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...y-Contract.png

Quote:

---

Why are we spending money for that magnitude of munitions???

---

I buy in bulk to save money. So does the government. This ammunition was purchased on contract, to be delivered and used over a long period of time. This is a normal amount of ammunition to purchase for this purpose, and we are saving quite a bit of money by paying for it all at once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mindcrime

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/webl...y-Contract.png

I buy in bulk to save money. So does the government. This ammunition was purchased on contract, to be delivered and used over a long period of time. This is a normal amount of ammunition to purchase for this purpose, and we are saving quite a bit of money by paying for it all at once.

---

Personally I find it deplorable that our government is spending that much on ammunition and hardware for domestic use?! When more and more Americans are receiving public assistance and food stamps. It makes zero sense unless there is a war here that I am missing.

Like you really care about spending on poor people. Give me a break.




b.b.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Save Us

Personally I find it deplorable that our government is spending that much on ammunition and hardware for domestic use?! When more and more Americans are receiving public assistance and food stamps. It makes zero sense unless there is a war here that I am missing.

---

This is a money-saving initiative. It's a wiser use of your tax dollars.

People who don't own or shoot guns tend to grossly underestimate how much ammo is actually needed & used by a gun owner. 1.6 Billion sounds like a huge number, but it's not shocking to someone who shoots even on a semi-regular basis. I can go through 200-300 rounds in an hour at the range. I usually shoot about 100-150 because they are getting more and more expensive. Even as someone who shoots once a month, I can go through over 1,000 rounds in a year as a single person. A federal agency needs to arm it's agents, train it's agents, and have backup ammo for their agents for years to come.

Here's a little tidbit: when the United States went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan, there was such a shortage of small and medium caliber ammunition that there were limits placed on marksmanship training. That's embarrassing. To make up for the shortage, the United States had to buy poorly made munitions from foreign armies. These cheap foreign munitions were less accurate and more prone to jamming, during combat and training. Anyone who has to fire a gun on behalf of our country should be highly trained and have the most accurate and consistent ammo at their disposal.

If people want to really rail about fiscal responsibility, they should attack the failed development of the Joint-Strike Fighter Jet ($2 Billion per aircraft), or the Trillions that went into saving bankers from their own toxic products, or the state procurement programs that buy $20,000 routers for tiny, one-room libraries in West Virginia.

Food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BorderBob

Like you really care about spending on poor people. Give me a break.
b.b.

---

Another clueless post..... you have not a clue as to what others think about the poor. We would see were your priorities where if you pay was brought down to proper level of work output. Ya, give is a break alright, please give us a break.

Quote:

---

GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS BEST WHEN THEY ARE AFRAID OF THEIR PEOPLE.

---

That is False! A govt functions best when they ARE their people... not when they're afraid of their people. If the govt was truly afraid of their own people then govt would do everything in their power to hide information and find ways to destroy their own people. Is that the America we want? No!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300miles

That is False! A govt functions best when they ARE their people... not when they're afraid of their people. If the govt was truly afraid of their own people then govt would do everything in their power to hide information and find ways to destroy their own people. Is that the America we want? No!

---

“A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!”

T. Jefferson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BorderBob

Like you really care about spending on poor people. Give me a break.




b.b.

---

Actually I do. I also buy American, and give heavily to charity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Save Us

“A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!”

T. Jefferson

---

WRONG AGAIN!

Quote:

---

Status: We have not found any evidence that Thomas Jefferson said or wrote, "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny," or any of its listed variations.

---

http://www.monticello.org/site/jeffe...bertyquotation

I wish all of you that push these quotes out would do the research before you go public. You embarass yourselves.




b.b.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BorderBob

WRONG AGAIN!



http://www.monticello.org/site/jeffe...bertyquotation

I wish all of you that push these quotes out would do the research before you go public. You embarass yourselves.




b.b.

---

Sorry,

“A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!”

Save Us

Did you go to the site. He didn't say anything like that. Not at all.

Quote:

---

Comments: One source attributes this quotation to Thomas Jefferson in The Federalist.[4] The Federalist, however, was the work of Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison; it also does not contain the text of this quotation. This quotation is vaguely similar to Jefferson's comment in an 1825 letter to William Short: "Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent."[5] To date however, the most likely source of this quotation appears to be a series of debates on socialism published in 1914, in which John Basil Barnhill said, "Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty."

---

b.b.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BorderBob

Did you go to the site. He didn't say anything like that. Not at all.
b.b.

---

Does not matter now... Save Us said it. Now it is valid... you can ignore truth all you want BB, it does not change it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Broughton

Does not matter now... Save Us said it. Now it is valid... you can ignore truth all you want BB, it does not change it.

---

You don't seem to mind ignoring the truth when it doesn't back up your personal opinion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300miles

You don't seem to mind ignoring the truth when it doesn't back up your personal opinion

---

I do? I have no opinion that is based is falsehoods sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Broughton

I do? I have no opinion that is based is falsehoods sorry.

---

Does not matter now... I said it. Now it is valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300miles

Does not matter now... I said it. Now it is valid.

---

Yes it does, you accused now back it up!

The whole point of quoting Thomas Jefferson is to add veracity to the idea. Since Jefferson never said it, it is not as effective as the poster hoped it would be. I like a lot of what TJ said, but I don't agree with his every word. Nor is anything he said beyond criticism just because he said it.

But like BB said, check your sources before trying to end a debate by misquoting a founding father or taking them out of context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Broughton

Yes it does, you accused now back it up!

---

you don't even recognize your own flawed logic when others repeat it, do you...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300miles

you don't even recognize your own flawed logic when others repeat it, do you...

---

No one repeated any flawed logic. My logic is not flawed. Now show me my opinion that is based in falsehoods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BorderBob

He didn't say anything like that. Not at all.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Broughton

Does not matter now... Save Us said it. Now it is valid.

---

*** vs ***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300miles

You don't seem to mind ignoring the truth when it doesn't back up your personal opinion

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Broughton

I do? I have no opinion that is based is falsehoods sorry.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 300miles

Does not matter now... I said it. Now it is valid.

---

If someone had misquoted the bible, or misquoted you, you would be upset about that sort of misinformation. Yes? If someone misquoted Thomas Jefferson to prove something you don't agree with, you'd be pretty upset over that too. Yes? But someone misquotes Jefferson to support an opinion that you DO agree with, and you think that's totally A-OK.

Do you understand?

okay.... I get it.

FYI - personally I would applaud a, "state procurement programs that buy $20,000 routers for tiny, one-room libraries in West Virginia" - I think thats much more practical and benefits the people - how does buying banned "Man Killer Bullets" for "Domestic use" - equate to being compared to encouraging literacy????????

Bullet shortage is "Embarrassing" - you mean we had to actually kill people with less than grade A Bullets ????????

Maybe if all our gun and ammunition companies weren't being driven out of America we could then have grade A made in USA bullets to kill our enemies with !!!!!!!!!!!!! Really Bob.

"Cost savings" - buy your own ammo for target practice. If it takes you a "Thousand rounds" of practice every year - I question your skill level - OH and by the way - honestly - how many times has your "precision shooting" saved your life here at home in your present job?

I would feel comfortable in stating you have not saved one life "On duty" with that gun you now wear. I would also believe contrary to the image your trying to create - I bet you haven't had one shot fired at you by a "Domestic Terrorist" or some Gun crazy "Boarder Hopper" lately.

I am not insulting or down playing your job - just your recent status quo attitude and justification for use of tax dollars.

Just my opinion - support your family - be proud of what you do. Be safe!

Are you talking to me?





b.b.

I think 4248 if replying to me, which is interesting, because I don't think he/she knows what I do for a living.