Coalition to Govern America
June 9, 2013
For at least the better part of the past year, the alternative media and the web has been abuzz about the massive quantities of ammunition purchases by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The DHS spooks have put out orders for purchases of of 1.6 billion bullets — at least some of which would be hollow point bullets, that have been banned for use in war by international guidelines. There has been much speculation as to the reason why the federal government would be arming itself to the hilt.
The Homeland Security Department attempted to explain away these purchases in a letter (pdf) to Senator Tom Coburn by stating that the massive quantities were for cost-efficiency measures.
"DHS routinely establishes strategic sourcing contracts that combine the requirements of all its Components for commonly purchased goods and services such as ammunition, computer equipment, and information technology services. These strategic sourcing contracts help leverage the purchasing power of DHS to efficiently procure equipment and supplies at significantly lower costs."
Considering the federal government's complete and obvious abandonment of any sense of fiscal responsibility, this "explanation" is laughable. They want to buy in bulk so they can save money? How thoughtful of them! Is anyone actually buying this?
Of course, the New York Times, in its typical globalist rag fashion, attempted to marginalize those of us who ask reasonable questions about the ammo buildup by calling us "extremists". Move along now, nothing to see here. Pay no attention to that tin-foil hat wearer behind the curtain.
Thankfully, not all of the mainstream media was as cavalier and dismissive about the very real issue of government tyranny. Ralph Benko, writing in a Forbes Op-Ed piece titled 1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It's Time For A National Conversation, addresses the question of not only the ammo, but the advanced military gear which is also being deployed on American streets:
Why, indeed, should the federal government not be deploying armored personnel carriers and stockpiling enough ammo for a 20-year war in the homeland? Because it’s wrong in every way. ... Spending money this way is beyond absurd well into perverse. According to the AP story a DHS spokesperson justifies this acquisition to “help the government get a low price for a big purchase.” Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center: “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.”
At 15 million rounds (which, in itself, is pretty extraordinary and sounds more like fun target-shooting-at-taxpayer-expense than a sensible training exercise) … that’s a stockpile that would last DHS over a century. To claim that it’s to “get a low price” for a ridiculously wasteful amount is an argument that could only fool a career civil servant.
And all of this, as the progressives in Congress, along with the communist in the White House, are attempting to disarm the American people. In true Rahm Emanuel fashion, they are capitalizing upon the dead bodies and injuries of various random shooting victims in a way that would make even the most hardened ambulance-chasing lawyer hang their head in shame. "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," Rahm said. It's called the Hegelian dialectic. Of course, many of these shooting incidents are questionable, at best. But that's a topic for another day. If there is no crisis, they can always create one. And they do. Watch out for those Homeland Security drills. They can be real barn burners.
It's nice to see that the growing truth movement and our associated truth media, are forcing the big media conglomerates to address important issues — even if it's in a dismissive or derogatory manner. In past times, they would just ignore us. Now, we are growing in number and have become a force with which they must reckon.
Just as important, is when the Congress also recognizes the need to address our concerns. It's just too bad they never seem to do anything that really matters.
This past week, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) proposed a resolution to HR 2217 - The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2014 (pdf), which was then passed by a vote of 234-192. It was widely reported that the measure would ban Homeland Security ammo purchases until the secretary provides a mission statement as to the details of the purpose and intended usage of the ammo.
I searched the bill. The requirement for the Secretary to report indeed appears in Section 567. However, no place in the bill was I able to locate a specific prohibition of the DHS to use taxpayer dollars to purchase ammo. You can read the bill here or I have it mirrored here. If someone can find the section that cuts off DHS ammo purchases, please post the specifics in the comments section below.
Specifically, the section of the bill with the Secretary reporting requirement is Section 567. It reads,
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to Congress, at the time that the President’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2015 is submitted pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a comprehensive report on purchase and usage of ammunition by the Department of Homeland Security, that includes—
(1) mission requirements pertaining to ammunition, including certification, qualification, training, and inventory requirements for each relevant Department component or agency and a comparison of such requirements to the requirements of Federal law enforcement agencies of the Department of Justice and the military components of the Department of Defense; and (2) details on all contracting practices applied by the Department of Homeland Security to procure ammunition, including comparative details regarding other contracting options with respect to cost and availability.
(b) Beginning on April 15, 2014, and quarterly thereafter, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit a report to Congress that includes —
(1) the quantity of ammunition in inventory in the Department of Homeland Security at the end of the preceding calendar quarter, subdivided by ammunition type, and how such quantity aligns to mission requirements of each relevant Department of Homeland Security component or agency;
(2) the quantity of ammunition used by the Department of Homeland Security during the preceding calendar quarter, subdivided by ammunition type, the purpose of such usage, the average number of rounds used per agent or officer subdivided by ammunition type, and how such usage aligns to mission requirements, including certification, qualification, and training requirements, for each relevant Department of Homeland Security component or agency; and
(3) the quantity of ammunition purchased by the Department of Homeland Security during the preceding calendar quarter, subdivided by ammunition type, and the associated contract details of such purchase, for each relevant Department of Homeland Security component or agency.
Being the cynical person that I am, I would have to say that if this bill truly banned the Department of Homeland Security from purchasing ammo, it would never go anywhere. Of course, it would have to be approved by the Senate, then either signed by the president, or have enough support in Congress for a veto override. All of which would be highly unlikely.
Hence, we are, once again, left with a lot of symbolism, but very little substance in Congressional, and Big Corporate Media -promoted "solutions" to the problem of over-bearing and totalitarian government. For a moment there, I might have gotten excited.
Personally, I like Thom Hartman's solution better when he proposed that we should repeal the PATRIOT Act and completely dissolve the Department of Homeland Security. Of course, that too is highly unlikely. Unless pressure is placed upon the state elected officials to nullify the federal laws, refuse federal money and mandates that come with the monetary gifts.
But for just a moment, I had to smile at the realization that as long as we are forced to live with DHS bureaucrats and their jack-booted thugs, not all gun control is bad — removing guns and ammo out of the hands of the feds is gun control "we can believe in."