BullfrogKen
Moderator Emeritus
Word.
Conspiricy explanation - govt ammo
- Thread starter armedandsafe
- Start date
- Status
Word.
ApacheCoTodd
member
I'd sure like to see any one of these illuminating articles tell me what the per-trainee and per sworn officer purchases were in past years.
Given the vast expansion in carrying officer numbers, I'm not to concerned.
Back in the 90's, I trained some weirdos at the Artesia, NM FLETC and watching the monsterous amounts of handgun and submachine gun ammo they went through back then (at only one site and mostly for initial training) causes me to take these "reports" with a grain of salt as to their singularity of volume.
Given the vast expansion in carrying officer numbers, I'm not to concerned.
Back in the 90's, I trained some weirdos at the Artesia, NM FLETC and watching the monsterous amounts of handgun and submachine gun ammo they went through back then (at only one site and mostly for initial training) causes me to take these "reports" with a grain of salt as to their singularity of volume.
OH NO, now we are going to have all that tinfoil flying off the shelves and have a tinfoil shortage. My wife is going to take a rolling pin to my head, no more dishes for her sunday church meetings covered in her favorate material. No more sandwichs packed for lunch in neat little squares of foil, now I will have to suffer with sticky plastic bags that hold in the moisture and make the bread soggy. And what thanksgiving and christmas is being cancled because the turkey and ham can not be made without those tinfoil pans and tinfoil on top of the main course!!!!!!!
This is becomming another emergency, quick everyone sign a petition to the tinfoil manufacturers to double their production so that life can continure as normal and my wife can stay calm.
I suppose we could use stainless steel, but that would impact the production of guns that I love to buy. (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL)
Besides tinfoil hats get too hot to wear in the mid day sun.
Jim
Donut Destroyer
Member
Try a metal colander. Re-usable and easy to attach with wires to the chicken wire on the walls and ceiling for extra protection. And with the ventilation holes it's good for summer use.
Fishslayer
Member
Ummmm... no. While the current occupier has undoubtedly sold more guns than Sam Colt, Horace & Daniel and Bill & Alex combined, the present hysteria has more to do with impending restrictions post Newtown... i.e. uncertainty.
The first Great Ammo Drought was over in 2010.
Why are LEO's being viewed as the bad guys? They are the ones who fight crime. Granted they can't "protect" us. But they catch the bad guys. They put them in jail. No they can't get them all, and there are bad apples. But they are on the front lines everyday. Every traffic stop could be their last. Every "disturbance" can be a shootout. Every "alarm" is an unknown. Would you want to do a building search in a bad area with a maglite and 357 revolver? I woldn't. I want officers to have the best weapons, the best body armor, and the best training possible. And I think anyone who doesn't want that, might have something to hide.
Skylerbone
Member
A few random thoughts on what I've just read.
As for the article in the OP, I agree that the numbers appear astronomical to the uninformed which is why conspiracy and fear work so well. To the person claiming a straw argument, I overheard these same purchase numbers discussed by two different vendors at a gunshow this weekend. Sorry, didn't interrupt to write down names.
To the person who feels a second large round of orders on the back of these six months from now might be a sign that something is afoot, consider the Continuing Resolution that funds the government. Baseline Budgeting holds that a previous year's budget becomes the basis for next year's need and builds in an increase of 4-10%. So, after the bailout apportioned huge increases to many of these departments, bloated budgets have left excess funds available so don't be too spooked if these same departments spend like crazy (and maybe buy more ammo).
To those who believe all law enforcement should have and use the best technology available to "do their job". Where do you draw the line? Do you hold that if the federal government uses thermal imaging cameras and listening devices to to watch suspects (those people with multiple firearms, thousands of rounds of ammo and emergency supplies...like members here) that local law enforcement ought to do the same? Best tools don't make their use right or justified IMO.
The comment that Waco was a lack of training...realize 80+ people lost their lives over the attempted serving of a search warrant. That warrant held that individuals had violated laws that violated the Second Amendment but hey, rules are rules.
I grew up the son of a law enforcement officer who started and finished his career outgunned for more than a quarter century. I can certainly appreciate the sentiment that better tools make many jobs easier but I do feel a line is being crossed and legislation introduced that makes the future a rather unsettling place to live in. I don't wear tinfoil hats but I recognize the erosion of freedom when I see it.
As for the article in the OP, I agree that the numbers appear astronomical to the uninformed which is why conspiracy and fear work so well. To the person claiming a straw argument, I overheard these same purchase numbers discussed by two different vendors at a gunshow this weekend. Sorry, didn't interrupt to write down names.
To the person who feels a second large round of orders on the back of these six months from now might be a sign that something is afoot, consider the Continuing Resolution that funds the government. Baseline Budgeting holds that a previous year's budget becomes the basis for next year's need and builds in an increase of 4-10%. So, after the bailout apportioned huge increases to many of these departments, bloated budgets have left excess funds available so don't be too spooked if these same departments spend like crazy (and maybe buy more ammo).
To those who believe all law enforcement should have and use the best technology available to "do their job". Where do you draw the line? Do you hold that if the federal government uses thermal imaging cameras and listening devices to to watch suspects (those people with multiple firearms, thousands of rounds of ammo and emergency supplies...like members here) that local law enforcement ought to do the same? Best tools don't make their use right or justified IMO.
The comment that Waco was a lack of training...realize 80+ people lost their lives over the attempted serving of a search warrant. That warrant held that individuals had violated laws that violated the Second Amendment but hey, rules are rules.
I grew up the son of a law enforcement officer who started and finished his career outgunned for more than a quarter century. I can certainly appreciate the sentiment that better tools make many jobs easier but I do feel a line is being crossed and legislation introduced that makes the future a rather unsettling place to live in. I don't wear tinfoil hats but I recognize the erosion of freedom when I see it.
dmancornell
Member
The cops don't "catch bad guys". They serve the state by enforcing the law. The law is sometimes right about the definition of "bad guys". Usually, it is not. But it is not the job of the police to decide who is a bad guy, it is the courts and juries. The militarization of police only serves to escalate situations and create violent confrontations where none existed, thus preventing them from doing their actual job (i.e. apprehending suspects).
Also your casual slur that anyone who dares question the police state must have something to hide is laughable. We want the police to have the same weaponry and equipment as civilians not because we fear being outgunned in a SWAT raid, but because we believe in the principles of equality under the law, not exceptions and loopholes for anyone with a government issued badge.
I'm a little unsure of the comments regarding PD's using drones. A predator drone is a multi-million dollar machine that requires trained operators and a multi-million dollar command and control "trailer". This is not what most police agencies would be getting, it would more likely be the 5-10 foot wingspan drones that are little more then RC planes on steroids. Sure, it might be deadly if the pilot crashed that thing right into you at full speed, but thats about it.
What it gives is that now smaller departments can afford to have a rapid "On-Call" air surveillance asset for pursuits and searches. No need to keep a helicopter and trained pilots, with increasingly better software, these things basically fly themselves. Best part, drones are cheap to run and cheap to maintain.
As for all of who are concerned about them...eh with about $1000 bucks and an internet connection you can build one of your own to orbit your house and provide 24/7 surveillance....or just aggravating your neighbors.
What it gives is that now smaller departments can afford to have a rapid "On-Call" air surveillance asset for pursuits and searches. No need to keep a helicopter and trained pilots, with increasingly better software, these things basically fly themselves. Best part, drones are cheap to run and cheap to maintain.
As for all of who are concerned about them...eh with about $1000 bucks and an internet connection you can build one of your own to orbit your house and provide 24/7 surveillance....or just aggravating your neighbors.
Tinpig
Member
I'm glad you're so optimistic.
According to this 1994 survey, when asked the question:
26% of Marines surveyed, said they would.
And 80% of the Marines surveyed indicated they would be willing to "participate in missions under a U.S. National Emergency Police Force."
http://thenewalexandrialibrary.com/armysurvey.html
Tinpig
Donut Destroyer
Member
skylerbone said:
Ummm....Yes. What I don't hold to is that any federal agency dedicates itself to watching anyone burying things in the yard or stockpiling ammo and MRE's. There are MANY more reasons why NightVision, FLIR and listening devices are valuable tools.
Yes, many people did lose their lives at Waco and most were by the hand of David Koresh and his lieutenants. The warrant that was in effect was lawfully signed by a judge and was for violations of federal law, not the 2nd Amendment. You say you were the son of a law enforcement officer, but obviously you never have been. You only see one side of the issue.
dmancornell said:
Really??? You mean after all these years, all the paperwork and all the people who went to jail, I never actually arrested a bad guy? OK, I see the hair you are trying to split here. Innocent until proven guilty. But that's like saying the price of gasoline isn't affected by OPEC because they don't sell gasoline, they sell oil. It isn't gasoline until it leaves the refinery. Let's face it, there are some bad people just wandering around. I can point out several that are just a waste of good air space. When they get arrested it is a bad guy getting arrested. It IS the job of the police to determine if there is enough probable cause to bring someone to a court, and some of the ones that are brought to court are very bad guys.
If the civilians are peaceful, then weaponry doesn't matter. If they are violent and intent on doing LEOs harm, then there is no such thing as a principle of equality. You have obviously never worn a badge either and have no clue what it's like. LEOs are trained how to survive. There is no fair or unfair when it comes to survival. It has nothing to do with exceptions or loopholes. They need and should be given every advantage available to be able to do their jobs effectively and to reduce the amount of danger they and bystanders are subject to at the hands of criminals who don't have shooting review boards and disciplinary panels and a, yes, dare I say it....a conscience. Do I think LEOs need artillery? No. Airstrikes? No. MOABs? No. Quality weapons and technical equipment? Yes. Absolutely.
12gaugeTim
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 293
Can I just say how counterproductive it is to dismiss anyone with an opinion that's even slightly outlandish as a tin foil hat wearing lunatic? People who mock like that are the reason why conspiracy theorists are no longer respected and the phrase itself lends an extremely negative connotation. Keep in mind the common folk would probably write off anyone who fears a government takeover or martial law as a "paranoid tin foil hat wearer".
Don't encourage people to blindly follow what the media says. Remember that Watergate was, at one time, nothing more than a conspiracy theory. Don't encourage people to sit inside Plato's cave of ignorance with you because its comfortable there and you'd rather not ask the hard questions.
Don't encourage people to blindly follow what the media says. Remember that Watergate was, at one time, nothing more than a conspiracy theory. Don't encourage people to sit inside Plato's cave of ignorance with you because its comfortable there and you'd rather not ask the hard questions.
dmancornell
Member
It is the job of the police to determine if there is probable cause of violating the law, not whether they are good or bad. "Taking care of bad guys" is a meaningless argument, albeit one that is used ad nauseum by police cheerleaders.
And frankly, by referring to the principle of innocent before proven guilty as "splitting hairs", I have no reason to trust your moral compass, no matter how many "bad guys" you claimed to have locked away.
Your job is to serve the state. The state should not be more well-armed than the civilians it supposedly serves. That is the heart of the 2nd Amendment. If your definition of quality weapons and equipment is the exact same items legally available to civilians at the same prices, then we have no conflict. If you think your survival requires pissing on 2A, then you should just quit your job.
Donut Destroyer
Member
I never said the principle of innocent until proven guilty was "splitting hairs", I said your opinion that someone can't be deemed as a bad guy until he is proven such by a court was said hair splitting. Meant as the phraseology, not the principle. And no matter how politically correct you want the world to be, the simple fact is that some people are bad as soon as they open their eyes in the morning and no court determination will change that. It's just a term....get over it.
If you really look at the weapons and technology I'm referring to, you will likely find that it IS all available to the general public. I can't do anything about prices, but there is nothing in the armory of my agency that isn't legal to own by private citizens, so I guess we have no conflict there, just a viewpoint from a different angle.
I'm not sure where anywhere in my post did I mention "pissing on 2A" in order to survive, so I won't belabor that remark and I'm certainly not going to quit my job just because you have a bone to pick with law enforcement, or so it seems.
The "heart of the 2nd Amendment" was about civic responsibility to protect the state. I'm doing my part, what are you doing?
If you really look at the weapons and technology I'm referring to, you will likely find that it IS all available to the general public. I can't do anything about prices, but there is nothing in the armory of my agency that isn't legal to own by private citizens, so I guess we have no conflict there, just a viewpoint from a different angle.
I'm not sure where anywhere in my post did I mention "pissing on 2A" in order to survive, so I won't belabor that remark and I'm certainly not going to quit my job just because you have a bone to pick with law enforcement, or so it seems.
The "heart of the 2nd Amendment" was about civic responsibility to protect the state. I'm doing my part, what are you doing?
Shadow 7D
Member
Used to be most things were solved on a PERSONAL level, no need to bring the law into it
now nobody will do anything
everything involves the law
and what used to be a cop, would call on a posse, and expect the lawful citizen to assist them, well... no the mentality is US/THEM
now nobody will do anything
everything involves the law
and what used to be a cop, would call on a posse, and expect the lawful citizen to assist them, well... no the mentality is US/THEM
Old Dog
Member
ah, no. I suspect you'd find (if you ever go out from in front of your computer and got to know some real cops) that most believe the job is to serve the people; some of us just happen to be employed by the state. Or is this, too, hair-splitting?
So, uh, just who is it then that's taking care of the bad guys? You? Your buddies? Every time I hear someone refer to "police cheerleaders" I tend to think that person has an agenda. You seem to.
Why, he's scoring debate points on The Internet! They also serve, those who point, type and click.
JohnBT
Member
"Used to be most things were solved on a PERSONAL level, no need to bring the law into it"
My father was a Virignia State Trooper after he got back from the Pacific and WWII. You must be talking about a time well before his. His cousin was a county sheriff for two or three decades back then and people certainly did call the cops regularly.
John
My father was a Virignia State Trooper after he got back from the Pacific and WWII. You must be talking about a time well before his. His cousin was a county sheriff for two or three decades back then and people certainly did call the cops regularly.
John
Until I see criminals regularley armed with full autos (not that they are more effective than semis) or a $9000 sniper rifle with a $4500 optic mounted on it, only then would I believe criminals out gun cops.
Keep in mind, that Hague or Geneva banned the use of hollow points in war and those rounds WILL be used domestically, either in training or whatever else.
Keep in mind, that Hague or Geneva banned the use of hollow points in war and those rounds WILL be used domestically, either in training or whatever else.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
I admire and respect the honorable service of all LEO and Military, current and prior. I thank them when I see my local police performing valuable functions in my community, and I do my part to promote the twin aims of Strength and Order in this country. I fully understand the desire for self-protection in a risky line of work. Not only from physical harm, but from prosecution and job security as well. When that unending quest for self-protection becomes a quest for superiority, it comes into conflict with individual liberty. For a sacred order of knights charged with upholding the rule of law in the land, police sure seem to be exempt from many of the laws they hold dear. As a common civilian, I see that as a conflict of interest. Fear is a powerful tool for garnering respect, and I fear many police see it as a means to secure personal safety on the job (yes, this is a "morals" vs. "realism" conundrum that requires careful balance)
Back in the day, police were criminally undergunned with their snub revolvers, and many needlessly lost their lives in situations they had no hope of surviving. Had they been allowed parity of weaponry with their suspects, their tactics, training, and organization would have likely carried the day in many of those cases. Even more civilians would have been able to fight back, force for force, with those who preyed upon them had they had the same weaponry. That is what I am advocating. Criminals will always be capable of getting the same guns police have, so they can be assumed to always be at least equal to police in equipment (radios, guns, armor, etc.). The "9s" carried by 'bangers are essentially equivalent to most service sidearms already. And yet law abiding citizens are for some reason supposed to be content spectators of the perpetual arms race and welcome disadvantage.
Military force has its place; the absolute destruction and subjugation of an implacable foe through that most horrible of contrivances "war." Police are supposed to be constructors of order, not bringers of overwhelming destructive force.
Thank you for making my point for me (especially if you intended to do so
). The governments and police forces in these areas are notoriously heavy-handed at times, have a reputation for flagrantly arrogant behavior (stop and frisk, anyone?), and are above any real accountability from their populations (how many Governors and senior politicians in Chicago are in the clink now, and yet there's still no repudiation of political dynasties, or a RICO case taking down the entire political hirearchy?).Progress, my friend, progress. Automatic guns were once trailer-mounted crew-served weapons, and 8-bit computers massively expensive contraptions spanning rooms and dozens of operators. In a year or even now, autonomous drones will be more the norm, only needing human direction occaisionally when important decisions (hint, hint) are needed. In the States, they will probably be used more like tower-mounted cameras, patrolling the same general "beat" gathering footage to be compiled for pending cases later, or targeted to observe suspects or other persons of interest. It's important we get out in front of this before we have a surveillance state like London in our big cities--it's not paranoia, it's human nature that authorities tend to take as much of the blanket as we give them. Seeing how our government acts with such impunity using drones overseas, I have every reason to be suspicious of their use over my roof.
Nice reference
. I've always imagined lots of mooing and baah-ing from the people tied up in that cave . For the record, I fear no totalitarian takeover in this nation, but I do know history. Terrible regimes alway ascend faster than anyone expects (Italy just elected a "charismatic loudmouth's" party of unknown origin; sound familiar?) I've seen where authorities are given an out to expand their influence, they take it, and then reap every reward that influence can garner. Our brilliantly frustrating system of checks and balances wasn't put together in response to a government that had crushed every means of resistance, but to guard against a government ever having such ambitions.I noticed this "Ammo Conspiracy" story has finally made Forbes online magazine...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2013/03/11/1-6-billion-rounds-of-ammo-for-homeland-security-its-time-for-a-national-conversation/
Still sounds a bit hokey as far as tin-foilery (they don't mention clearly that the contracts are an optional maximum), but the desire for under-oath explanations from the folks making these (budgetarily dubious) decisions seems legitimate.
In a more rural setting, I would guess (since I'm not from one) that authority is more locally distributed and the police are highly responsible to their community, whom they know personally. The big cities is different. There are so many police, so many people, that both become mere faces to eachother, initiatives and assignments are directed from on high, and the only real input the public has on the process is occaisional votes for bonds and commissioners--about as indirect an oversight process as can be imagined. Here, the police have great latitude as to how to govern their affairs, with little to no regard for the public's perception so long as the city government approves. That said, there are an awful lot of rural towns here in Texas who over the years have had to round up their entire police departments for corruption and drug running.
My criticism is not of individual officers' honorable and valuable service, but of how it may be misdirected by their superiors if they are not reigned in appropriately. Just as many non-gunnies are ignorant of the potential they may need a gun one day, many people fail to percieve the ebb and flow of political power through our system (which "grows from the barrel of a gun").
Noble Cause Corruption
TCB
Please refrain from personal attacks or belittlement
I have always wondered one thing about police. Has the approach and attitude taken by local police changed the attitudes and reaction citizens have towards police, or have police changed their approach as a reaction to the attitudes of the people. I know what the LEO's are going to say, but, like they like to accuse us, they probably only see one side of the argument. I am 36. I can remember being a kid talking to cops around the neighborhood, in the hardware store drinking coffee with the old men, around the VFW, doughnut shop, grocery store, etc. We knew them by name and everyone liked them. This is in a blue collar neighborhood in DFW, not some small town. Now police are intimidating if you do not know them, and the last thing they are is approachable. They feel they have to dominate every situation they are in no matter what that situation may be. I am white collar now and don't trust them. I have seen them do things that there predecessors would never dream of. I would imagine that the amount of people that do not trust police today is far higher than it was then, at least in my parts. Honest working people back then saw them as honest working people too. Now they view them with far more suspicion. And from all of that are we safer today? Are police? I read an article on a plane last year, I thin in the Economist, that you are more likely to be injured or killed today by a cop than you were fifty years ago, and twice as likely to be involved in an incident involving casualties today than then. I wish I could find that article to cite it, but it did get me thinking about my hometown.
Sorry, I know that has nothing to do with the OP.
Sorry, I know that has nothing to do with the OP.
dmancornell
Member
LOL, I totally believe that cops think they serve the people. It's called delusion. The same delusion that fuels some cops' persecution complex, which makes them defend laws that prohibit civilian ownership of certain items, even as they use taxpayer money to buy said items.
And yeah, I have an agenda. Militarization of police is arguably the most direct assault on civil rights today, and it's something that must be addressed immediately. The ACLU recently launched a new initiative to document this phenomenon, I'm sure OP's article on MRAP acquisition will be mentioned.
Donut Destroyer
Member
barnbwt said:
You said a lot there and I appreciate the thought that went into it. You see issues and problems, but you also understand how problems change and thus how the methods used to confront the problems must change. I have been in law enforcement for 36 years, since I was 18. Integrity, honesty and fairness have always been of utmost importance to me. I do recognize that I serve the public, whether you call it the city, parish (we don't have counties in LA remember), the state or "the government" in general, it is still a service to my community and its citizens. It pains me to no end when I hear of police corruption or abuse of authority and such behavior should not be tolerated by society or even by the brotherhood. Sadly, all of us who wear the badge are painted with the same brush as those who do wrong. It's human nature. I don't know how to solve the problems of corruption at higher levels because it happens everywhere there is greed and no mechanism to combat it....or where there are mechanisms in place that roadblock the efforts to combat it (I have my opinions here, but don't want to start a war).
A lot was said in previous posts about technical capabilities, but the down side was all that was focused on, and that's what my points have been. Tools, equipment, training are all good things when used properly. I'm not advocating crew served weapons or armor. If a police SWAT team has select fire weapons, so what? They are all legally registered and possessed and can be registered and possessed by civilians. If a patrol officer can carriy an agency issued M4 semi-auto, good, they should. There are a lot of knee jerk reactions going on in the form of legislation and it is to be seen how far and how outlandish it gets. It shouldn't hamper a police officer's ability to do his job or to have the best tools available to him.
Forbes is accept the often stated 1.6 Billion Round figure and the math that goes with THAT figure. The math that worked toward explaining 350,000,000 rounds is stretched a bit thin at the current figure (even discounting a severe math error on the amount purchased last week.) It is time for somebody in Congress to hold Janet Napolitano and other administration operatives to account for this and whatever tanks and full auto rifles they have stockpiled. They also need to be grilled on a definition of potential terrorist that seems to encompass the bulk of people who may entertain patriotic or religious feelings and did not vote for the Democrats. It would not hurt to have grownup look into these things given the history of democide just within the last century.
The usual conspiracy nonsense.
- Status
