Why Does The Department Of Homeland Security Need 450M Hollow Point Bullets?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Indy_Guy_77

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Apr 30, 2008
    16,576
    48
    but it's the taxpayers money they are using:xmad:

    Do you not want Federal LEO to be well trained with their firearms?

    For that matter, don't we (we, as in INGO members in general) want ALL LEO to be well trained?

    I don't know how or why, because I really do know better, but the knee-jerk reactions and refusal to examine things logically by so many really is surprising.

    -J-
     

    Blackhawk2001

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 20, 2010
    8,218
    113
    NW Indianapolis
    Maybe federal agents should buy their own equipment. Guns, uniforms, vest, ammo. They wouldn't be the first professionals that bought their own gear.

    Consider another career choice: auto mechanics. They need tools if they want to make a living. A professional auto mechanic often has purchased thousands of dollars worth of tools & equipment in order to properly function in his job, in a dealership or auto shop.

    And just like other aspiring professionals that go into personal debt to obtain a marketable skill, these federal agents can pay for their own training too.

    They might not be the "first professionals that bought their own gear", but they wouldn't be the norm for Public Safety professions if they did. Most major law enforcement agencies provide professional safety equipment for their employees. This is true for the fire service and EMS as well as many/most law enforcement agencies. Providing personal protective equipment ensures that personnel are protected to a set standard and also serves to help in the standardization of training and equipment purchases (because bulk purchases of equipment generally result in cost savings to the purchaser). I'm aware that some relatively small police agencies require their officers to purchase their firearms and carry equipment, while other agencies make such purchases optional, but that is not the norm. Not every large police agency has standardization in its weapons procurement - the Chicago Police Department doesn't - but in such cases it is usually a matter of the expense of purchasing a large number of weapons. Still, it is more normal for professional public safety agencies to issue personal protective equipment to their employees than not.
     

    Clay

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 98.8%
    81   1   0
    Aug 28, 2008
    9,648
    48
    Vigo Co
    450MM? you must be involved in accounting or the metals industry. Ive never seen anyone use "MM" outside of that. ;)
     

    .45 Dave

    Master
    Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 13, 2010
    1,519
    38
    Anderson
    I asked a friend about this and this the email he sent back. I think it makes sense.


    The purchase is for the entire DHS. DHS Is comprised of: Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Secret Service, Office of Inspector General. MOST of which train and have armed agents.

    DHS has about 216,000 employees. (Which is about 216,000 too many.)

    The purchase is an estimate for over five years.

    They purchased about 200 million rounds 3 years ago and have ran through them.

    They may be stockpiling some but an organization that large is going to run through a hell of a lot of rounds training and qualifying.

    As a retired police firearms instructor said "in the great scheme of things, that's not all that many bullets when you spread it out over a five year period. Then you've got to factor in the number of qualifications and training cycles over that period, which may be as many as four quals + training cycles per year."
     

    Blackhawk2001

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jun 20, 2010
    8,218
    113
    NW Indianapolis
    FEMA employees aren't armed. (Just nit picking here) I'd be happy to see DHS go away and let the subordinate agencies go back to their original configurations, especially FEMA.
     

    steveh_131

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    10,046
    83
    Porter County
    Wnd59.gif
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    They might not be the "first professionals that bought their own gear", but they wouldn't be the norm for Public Safety professions if they did. Most major law enforcement agencies provide professional safety equipment for their employees. This is true for the fire service and EMS as well as many/most law enforcement agencies. Providing personal protective equipment ensures that personnel are protected to a set standard and also serves to help in the standardization of training and equipment purchases (because bulk purchases of equipment generally result in cost savings to the purchaser). I'm aware that some relatively small police agencies require their officers to purchase their firearms and carry equipment, while other agencies make such purchases optional, but that is not the norm. Not every large police agency has standardization in its weapons procurement - the Chicago Police Department doesn't - but in such cases it is usually a matter of the expense of purchasing a large number of weapons. Still, it is more normal for professional public safety agencies to issue personal protective equipment to their employees than not.
    I am of the opinion that the government's norms are an abysmal failure.

    $15,600,000,000,000 and counting! -- U.S. National Debt Clock

    Let's balance the budget before we doling out these luxuries to Customs & ATF agents.
    http://www.usdebtclock.org/
     

    jdwhitak

    Plinker
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Feb 25, 2012
    137
    18
    The only problem that I see with the it's for training argument is this. The contract is for hollow point bullets. Why train with a bullet that costs 3-5x more than regular ball ammo? And before you say that they are paying more to gouge the taxpayer let me point this out too. If they spend more on ammo then that means less money to spend on other things like: drones, armored vehicles, spiffy new handguns/rifles, etc.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    YOU try talking sense into them. I cannot penetrate the protective tinfoil headgear.:D

    It is not a matter of tinfoil hats preventing the understanding of your point. The issue is that there should be zero rounds of ammunition purchased by a division of the federal government which should not exist.
     
    Top Bottom