DHS Questions

This is a discussion on DHS Questions within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz said Thursday that the Department of Homeland Security is using roughly 1,000 rounds of ammunition more per person than the U.S. ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 43
Like Tree23Likes

Thread: DHS Questions

  1. #1
    Member Array Cheesewiz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Southern Nevada
    Posts
    407

    DHS Questions

    Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz said Thursday that the Department of Homeland Security is using roughly 1,000 rounds of ammunition more per person than the U.S. Army, as he and other lawmakers sharply questioned DHS officials on their "massive" bullet buys.
    "
    It is entirely ... inexplicable why the Department of Homeland Security needs so much ammunition," Chaffetz, R-Utah, said at a hearing.
    The hearing itself was unusual, as questions about the department's ammunition purchases until recently had bubbled largely under the radar -- on blogs and in the occasional news article. But as the Department of Homeland Security found itself publicly defending the purchases, lawmakers gradually showed more interest in the issue.

    Democratic Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass., at the opening of the hearing, ridiculed the concerns as "conspiracy theories" which have "no place" in the committee room.
    But Republicans said the purchases raise "serious" questions about waste and accountability.

    Chaffetz, who chairs one of the House oversight subcommittees holding the hearing Thursday, revealed that the department currently has more than 260 million rounds in stock. He said the department bought more than 103 million rounds in 2012 and used 116 million that same year -- among roughly 70,000 agents.

    Comparing that with the small-arms purchases procured by the U.S. Army, he said the DHS is churning through between 1,300 and 1,600 rounds per officer, while the U.S. Army goes through roughly 350 rounds per soldier.

    He noted that is "roughly 1,000 rounds more per person."
    "Their officers use what seems to be an exorbitant amount of ammunition," he said.

    Nick Nayak, chief procurement officer for the Department of Homeland Security, did not challenge Chaffetz's numbers.

    However, Nayak sought to counter what he described as several misconceptions about the bullet buys.
    Despite reports that the department was trying to buy up to 1.6 billion rounds over five years, he said that is not true. He later clarified that the number is closer to 750 million.

    He said the department, on average, buys roughly 100 million rounds per year.
    He also said claims that the department is stockpiling ammo are "simply not true." Further, he countered claims that the purchases are helping create broader ammunition shortages in the U.S.
    The department has long said it needs the bullets for agents in training and on duty, and buys in bulk to save money.

    While Democrats likened concerns about the purchases to conspiracy theories, Republicans raised concern about the sheer cost of the ammunition.
    "This is not about conspiracy theories, this is about good government," Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said.

    Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who chairs the full Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said he suspects rounds are being stockpiled, and then either "disposed of," passed to non-federal agencies, or shot "indiscriminately."
    If that is the case, he said, "then shame on you."


    Read more: Reps challenge DHS ammo buys, say agency using 1,000 more rounds per person than Army | Fox News

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Stevew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    3,376
    Just so long as they aren't supplying to bullets for the fast and furious guns.
    Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around laws. Plato

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Array DaveWorkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    585
    Lawmakers move to limit govt. ammo purchases

    In the wake of a Thursday hearing that raised questions and hackles about Department of Homeland Security ammunition purchases, two Oklahoma lawmakers introduced legislation Friday morning to put the brakes on government stockpiling of ammo.

    Lawmakers move to limit govt. ammo purchases - Seattle gun rights | Examiner.com
    Cheesewiz likes this.

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    If, according their own testimony, DHS has 260 million rounds in stock and only uses around 100 million rounds a year, how is that not stockpiling?
    pittypat21 and 84160 like this.

  6. #5
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,885
    Let's see - taking the numbers without challenge (which may be a mistake)

    116,000,000/70,000=1,657 rounds per year / 12=138 rounds per month - less than 3 boxes per agent per month. I don't know if they are actually training that much, but it is not much if they are.
    awoodpd13 likes this.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,170
    Quote Originally Posted by ksholder View Post
    Let's see - taking the numbers without challenge (which may be a mistake)

    116,000,000/70,000=1,657 rounds per year / 12=138 rounds per month - less than 3 boxes per agent per month. I don't know if they are actually training that much, but it is not much if they are.
    Would you quit with the math...? It annoys the tinfoil.
    It could be worse.
    "The History of our Revolution will be one continued Lye from one end to the other."
    John Adams
    "A gun is kind of like a parachute. If you need one and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again".

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array mprp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,886
    I thought tinfoil reflected math.
    Cheesewiz and The Old Anglo like this.
    Vietnam Vets, WELCOME HOME

    Crossman 760 BB/Pellet, Daisy Red Ryder, Crossman Wrist Rocket, 14 Steak Knives, 3 Fillet Knives, Rolling Pin-14", Various Hunting Knives, 2 Baseball Bats, 3 Big Dogs and a big American Flag flying in the yard. I have no firearms; Try the next house.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by phreddy View Post
    If, according their own testimony, DHS has 260 million rounds in stock and only uses around 100 million rounds a year, how is that not stockpiling?
    Well if you are accepting the numbers as given they are shooting more than they are buying. How is using up more than you buy stockpiling?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    Well if you are accepting the numbers as given they are shooting more than they are buying. How is using up more than you buy stockpiling?
    They testified that they are buying around 750 million rounds per year for the next 5 years instead of 1.6 billion. That comes out to 150 million rounds they are purchasing a year. They are shooting 116 million round a year and have over 2 years of ammunition on hand. They could not purchase a round for a whole year and still have plenty. I see no reason why they should be buying any when we are running huge deficits and it should have no effect on their training levels.
    Cheesewiz likes this.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by phreddy View Post
    They testified that they are buying around 750 million rounds per year for the next 5 years instead of 1.6 billion. That comes out to 150 million rounds they are purchasing a year. They are shooting 116 million round a year and have over 2 years of ammunition on hand. They could not purchase a round for a whole year and still have plenty. I see no reason why they should be buying any when we are running huge deficits and it should have no effect on their training levels.
    They did not say they were buying that much. They said they reserved the right to buy that much. Big difference.

    As far as no effect on their training levels that assumes that staffing levels remain exactly as they have been. The exact same number of retirements and new hires each year. A guy who has been on ten years and only does his quarterly qualifications is going to require significantly less ammo than a new hire attending FLETC isn't he? What is going on with the work force today nationwide? What are the baby boomers doing? With more retirements if you keep staffing levels static you must have more new hires to replace them. Same number of employees but your ammo usage just went up.

    And again, with numbers you provided they fired 13 million more rounds last year than they bought. How is that stockpiling?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  12. #11
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    And again, with numbers you provided they fired 13 million more rounds last year than they bought. How is that stockpiling?
    Definition of STOCKPILE
    : a storage pile: as a : a reserve supply of something essential accumulated within a country for use during a shortage b : a gradually accumulated reserve of something

    They have more than 2 years worth on hand right now. That is the definition of a stockpile.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Which they are reducing. "Stockpiling" would be actively accumulating a reserve supply wouldn't it? That would require buying more than they are shooting which by the article they are not. While they may have in the past accumulated a stockpile they are now reducing/eliminating it.
    Or is something I have just stated here factually incorrect?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array lionround's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Memphis
    Posts
    1,730
    OK, let's do some more math (I know it bounces off the tin foil, but ...)

    From the article, "However, Nayak sought to counter what he described as several misconceptions about the bullet buys.
    Despite reports that the department was trying to buy up to 1.6 billion rounds over five years, he said that is not true. He later clarified that the number is closer to 750 million.

    He said the department, on average, buys roughly 100 million rounds per year."

    So, they aren't buying 1.6 billion rounds in 5 years, ONLY 750 million. But he also said they buy, on average, 100 million/year. So, they have increased their buying by 50% over their average. Why?
    The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
    -- Steven Wright
    1950 Colt .38 Police Positive Special
    2013 SCCY 9mm CPX-2 Stainless Steel
    US Army 1973-1977, 95B

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    If you read the articles from the last hearing and other ones from this you will see that the writer here is misleading a bit. They are not buying 150 million rounds per year. They are reserving the right to buy that many.
    That means if prices double during this contact year the vendors are obligated to honor their price for up to that quantity for the remainder of the year.
    Last edited by mcp1810; April 26th, 2013 at 09:25 PM.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by lionround View Post
    OK, let's do some more math (I know it bounces off the tin foil, but ...)

    So, they aren't buying 1.6 billion rounds in 5 years, ONLY 750 million. But he also said they buy, on average, 100 million/year. So, they have increased their buying by 50% over their average. Why?
    I buy ten widgets a year from you at a contract price of ten dollars per widget. Our contract allows me to buy up to fifteen widgets per year at that price, even though I normally only buy ten. If the production cost of widgets suddenly doubles, I (if I can come up with the money) buy an additional five widgets from you this year at ten dollars per. I know you are not going to renew the contract at this price. I order my additional five widgets. Next year, under the new contract I only have to buy half as many widgets at the higher contract price.

    Instead of buying my ten widgets this year (cost $100) and ten next year (cost $200) I buy fifteen this year ($150) and five next year ($100) and save money that way.
    awoodpd13 likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

dhs oig what do they look for whey come out

,

sccy hires glock employees

Click on a term to search for related topics.