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

Forbes ^ | 3/11/2013 | Ralph Benko

[762X51]

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.

[Noumenon]

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...

[rlmorel]

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.

[Lazamataz]

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

[Lazamataz]

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.

[Zeneta]

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

[jonrick46]

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

[GOPJ]

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?

[cicero2k]

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.

[MachIV]

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”.

[RedHeeler]

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

[indthkr]

DHS bump for later.....

[RedHeeler]

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

[sinsofsolarempirefan]

In his later years maybe...

[RedHeeler]

At least, you took a look. Thank you.

[stuartcr]

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.

[Gator113]

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.

[ConservaTexan]

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?

[rlmorel]

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.

[wildbill]

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?