No comment but does anyone care to try to explain.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...let-stockpile/

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...let-stockpile/

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

the ammo stockpile explained ..

Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga . The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.
Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities. The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella. The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year.
The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency.


as for the 2700 aromored vehicles I'd guess DHS is spending what they can, while they can pending possible defense spending cuts ..

personally, Im more concerned how the authorization to spend the $$ made it through congress when congress is yammering "cut spending" with every breath?

explain that

What was the purchase price and subsequent retrofit cost per unit? I'll guarantee it ain't cheap.
Obviously these were delivered before the sequestration. But instead of backpedaling on purchases like this, DHS is furloughing employees because of the spending rollbacks? I suppose the draconian approach gets much more emotional response though.

Lots of law enforcement agencies, particularly the federal ones, have MRAPs. But...2,700 seems excessive. And, I still don't believe the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition story. Neither of those numbers make sense.

And, I suspect backpedaling on a deal like this would involve lawsuits. Government contracts for these types of purchases, just like a private buyer. Backing out is not an option just because you suddenly don't like the deal....unless you want to get sued.

It’s as annoying as hell that today’s ignorant journalists keep identifying armored personnel carriers as “tanks”. Some one's congressman brought home the bacon, because while MRAPs may be able to provide the best protection from IEDs there is, they are also very prone to rollover; thus, injuring and killing the men inside.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/0..._MRAP_070108w/

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news...lover-100510w/

the ammo story is true, the contracts spread out the purchase over the next 5 years ... kinda like Southwest Airlines buying bulk fuel for the next 5 years when fuel prices were considerably lower than they are now ... apparently 2700 Toys went to, or are intended to go to SWAT teams so they can show off ..


uh IB, those MARP's are intended for use here in the states

the ammo story is true, the contracts spread out the purchase over the next 5 years ... kinda like Southwest Airlines buying bulk fuel for the next 5 years when fuel prices were considerably lower than they are now ... apparently 2700 Toys went to, or are intended to go to SWAT teams so they can show off ..


uh IB, those MARP's are intended for use here in the states Originally Posted by CJ7

Who said otherwise, CBJ7? The MRAPs are notoriously prone to rollovers regardless of where they are deployed, CBJ7.

Who said otherwise, CBJ7? The MRAPs are notoriously prone to rollovers regardless of where they are deployed, CBJ7. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

pretty sure they will rollover before they get blown to hell by an IED

pretty sure they will rollover before they get blown to hell by an IED Originally Posted by CJ7

Exactly, CBJ7! Exactly!!!!

So, other than some congressman bringing home the pork, why would DHS choose this vehicle -- notorious for a major safety concern -- to be deployed on the homefront!?!

It is a stupid idea to put these MRAPs in the hands of police departments. I can think of about 5 times in the past 20 years when things like these MIGHT have been useful - like Waco or that big bank shootout in California.

Otherwise, you are asking for trouble. Police departments have shown a penchant for using these things just to justify the expense of having them. They stupidly overreact to even minor situations.

Even with older types of armored vehicles, there are already numerous stories of the police attaching battering rams on the fronts of the "tanks" and knocking in the walls of some drug house. Couple that with all the SWAT cops and even regular cops in full body armor and it looks like Gestapo stormtroopers raiding American neighborhoods.

It's all macho bullshit. it exacerbates tense situations as often as it pacifies them.

The rollover issue is a distraction. These things are a bad idea even if they NEVER rollover. The rollovers occur on sloped terrain or fast turns. That isn't going to be a problem in 99% of domestic situations. These things aren't going to rollover going down a street and across a lawn in Garland or Dallas. The problem is that they shouldn't be going down a street in Garland or Dallas in the first place. The only cops that want these are cowboy types, who shouldn't be on the force in the first place.

In the name of fighting a losing drug war, we are creating our own little police state right here in the good old USA.

These things are useless for fighting a REAL terrorist situation, like a bombing in a subway or a mall. They do no good after the fact.

There is currently a dangerous harassment tactic called "swatting". An asshole with an ax to grind makes a crank call to 911 and reports a shooting and a gunman taking hostages at the home of someone the caller doesn't like. The SWAT team shows up and kicks in doors and potentially shoots an innocent homeowner who just woke up from a deep sleep.

Now throw these behemoths into the mix. Not a good addition.

Oh, I dunno. I guess those cops out in California could have used one with that Dorner psycho once they got him cornered. Any kind of a stand-off or hostage situation, an MRAP might be handy.

I agree that using them for everyday law enforcement activities is a bad idea. I'm still trying to figure out why they need 2,700 of them. I didn't read the whole story....they must be surplus from Iraq, right? Maybe the military gave them to DHS?

It is a stupid idea to put these MRAPs in the hands of police departments. I can think of about 5 times in the past 20 years when things like these MIGHT have been useful - like Waco or that big bank shootout in California.

Otherwise, you are asking for trouble. Police departments have shown a penchant for using these things just to justify the expense of having them. They stupidly overreact to even minor situations.

Even with older types of armored vehicles, there are already numerous stories of the police attaching battering rams on the fronts of the "tanks" and knocking in the walls of some drug house. Couple that with all the SWAT cops and even regular cops in full body armor and it looks like Gestapo stormtroopers raiding American neighborhoods.

It's all macho bullshit. it exacerbates tense situations as often as it pacifies them.

The rollover issue is a distraction. These things are a bad idea even if they NEVER rollover. The rollovers occur on sloped terrain or fast turns. That isn't going to be a problem in 99% of domestic situations. These things aren't going to rollover going down a street and across a lawn in Garland or Dallas. The problem is that they shouldn't be going down a street in Garland or Dallas in the first place. The only cops that want these are cowboy types, who shouldn't be on the force in the first place.

In the name of fighting a losing drug war, we are creating our own little police state right here in the good old USA.

These things are useless for fighting a REAL terrorist situation, like a bombing in a subway or a mall. They do no good after the fact.

There is currently a dangerous harassment tactic called "swatting". An asshole with an ax to grind makes a crank call to 911 and reports a shooting and a gunman taking hostages at the home of someone the caller doesn't like. The SWAT team shows up and kicks in doors and potentially shoots an innocent homeowner who just woke up from a deep sleep.

Now throw these behemoths into the mix. Not a good addition. Originally Posted by ExNYer

White is nice. There has been a lot of snow recently up north.

Oh, I dunno. I guess those cops out in California could have used one with that Dorner psycho once they got him cornered. Any kind of a stand-off or hostage situation, an MRAP might be handy.

I agree that using them for everyday law enforcement activities is a bad idea. I'm still trying to figure out why they need 2,700 of them. I didn't read the whole story....they must be surplus from Iraq, right? Maybe the military gave them to DHS? Originally Posted by timpage

With 2700 of them, even small town police forces will be getting one.

Do the cops in Mexia or Teague really need one?

It's perfect opportunity for some Rambo wannabe to go smash into some mobile home where there MIGHT be some pot plants or a meth lab and they don't want to take any chances with a shootout.

Brand spanking new. Cost? Who knows? Did the Congress know about this? I understand about mass buying of resources but you use the (well, they used it) time frame of 5 years. Do the math, this is more like 50 years of ammo. So we don't buy another round for 50 years??? I will ask our current Afghan vet at work about the MRAP but he has made it known that he thinks the South Africans had something better and already on the shelf. Still, when was the last time that someone BLEWUP a police armored vehicle with an IED?