• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Are you mentally ill?

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,265
Location
In My Coffee
In a SHTF situation, that devastates numbers of States--will happen one day, guaranteed--there will be massive loss of life within the first month. I think coffins will be a waste of time; we will need bulldozers, and backhoes.

The number of rounds keep going up with each regurgitation. By the end of the year, it will be 100,000,000,000 rounds.
 

hjmoosejaw

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
406
Location
N.W. Pa.
I picked a billion, cause from the reports I've seen, it was like 400,00 for one agency, 2 or 3 hundred thousand for another, a couple of hundred thousand to another. It came out to like a billion.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
Democide

I picked a billion, cause from the reports I've seen, it was like 400,00 for one agency, 2 or 3 hundred thousand for another, a couple of hundred thousand to another. It came out to like a billion.

Go look at the numbers of sworn personnel in those agencies (like postal inspectors) and the time frame of the contracts. It calculates out to something less than 300 rounds per person per year. That's practice, qualification, and carry. I did the math right after the contracts were announced, and it's a reasonable number. The quickest reference is Wiki, which shows 105,000 full time, sworn officers in the direct employ of federal agencies and departments.
 

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
Go look at the numbers of sworn personnel in those agencies (like postal inspectors) and the time frame of the contracts. It calculates out to something less than 300 rounds per person per year. That's practice, qualification, and carry. I did the math right after the contracts were announced, and it's a reasonable number. The quickest reference is Wiki, which shows 105,000 full time, sworn officers in the direct employ of federal agencies and departments.

While I can't talk for other services, the AF shoots only 90 rounds of handgun ammo to qualify (45 practice, then 45 for actual qual). We shoot this anywhere from every ~6 months to every 2 years (and at some bases where there's an "ammo shortage" it can be even longer as they only have you shoot just before you deploy). The comes out to ~180 rounds for some of the better trained forces like security forces (but excluding special forces simply because I don't know about them but would expect that depending on their job they get to shoot far more) to 45 rounds or less per year. So why are these civilian agencies practicing more than our military and why are they doing it with more expensive hollow-point ammo instead of cheaper training ammo?
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
Democide

Sorry, DHS says they are in for 1384 per officer per year.

They only have to contract and stock one kind if ammo, and I doubt the minimal cost difference would justify two inventories and two contracts.

I'm not LEO, and I shoot 4000-6000 every year. (Average about 100/wk, I miss some weeks, but take 1 or 2 courses a year at 500-2000 rounds each.)
 
Last edited:

Z1P2

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
85
Location
Corryton
more orders for ammo have gone out... the latest figures I have seen show 2.1 billion rounds ordered so far. Or as one newspaper put it, enough to shoot every citizen and illegal alien in this country five times.
 

DamonK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
585
Location
Ft. Lewis, WA
Re: Democide

Sorry, DHS says they are in for 1384 per officer per year.

They only have to contract and stock one kind if ammo, and I doubt the minimal cost difference would justify two inventories and two contracts.

I'm not LEO, and I shoot 4000-6000 every year. (Average about 100/wk, I miss some weeks, but take 1 or 2 courses a year at 500-2000 rounds each.)

You actually shoot a lot more that the military or officers do. I personally shoot about the same. Most of my friends that are still in are incredibly jealous as they get to qualify at most once a year. Typically only if you're about to deploy.

There is a significant cost difference. That is taking into consideration the logistics of maintaining a dual supply. Also, these guys are apparently shooting significantly more that the armed forces in practice if what they claim is true. And I doubt that very much. You don't practice on a regular basis with expensive hollowpoints. No government entity anywhere in the world does.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
 

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
Sorry, DHS says they are in for 1384 per officer per year.

They only have to contract and stock one kind if ammo, and I doubt the minimal cost difference would justify two inventories and two contracts.

I'm not LEO, and I shoot 4000-6000 every year. (Average about 100/wk, I miss some weeks, but take 1 or 2 courses a year at 500-2000 rounds each.)

That means at a min you spend approx $1360 for target ammo ($17 per box of 50) or...over $4000 (hydrashok was listed at $25 for a box of 20 for a comparison) should you choose to practice with hollow-points. Even if you got a 25% discount for buying in bulk you would have still of spent over 50% more for being lazy and not training with practice ammo. So no, I'm not buying it as being cheaper to only have a contract for one type of ammo.

And really, two inventories is supposed to be hard to manage? There's sooooo many different and easy ways to do this for no additional cost that it isn't even funny.
 

DamonK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
585
Location
Ft. Lewis, WA
Re: Democide

That means at a min you spend approx $1360 for target ammo ($17 per box of 50) or...over $4000 (hydrashok was listed at $25 for a box of 20 for a comparison) should you choose to practice with hollow-points. Even if you got a 25% discount for buying in bulk you would have still of spent over 50% more for being lazy and not training with practice ammo. So no, I'm not buying it as being cheaper to only have a contract for one type of ammo.

And really, two inventories is supposed to be hard to manage? There's sooooo many different and easy ways to do this for no additional cost that it isn't even funny.

+10 Exactly!

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,925
Location
North Carolina
That means at a min you spend approx $1360 for target ammo ($17 per box of 50) or...over $4000 (hydrashok was listed at $25 for a box of 20 for a comparison) should you choose to practice with hollow-points. Even if you got a 25% discount for buying in bulk you would have still of spent over 50% more for being lazy and not training with practice ammo. So no, I'm not buying it as being cheaper to only have a contract for one type of ammo.

And really, two inventories is supposed to be hard to manage? There's sooooo many different and easy ways to do this for no additional cost that it isn't even funny.

If they can't handle more than one inventory for ammo, how can we trust them to manage inventory of evidence?
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,193
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Go look at the numbers of sworn personnel in those agencies (like postal inspectors) and the time frame of the contracts. It calculates out to something less than 300 rounds per person per year. That's practice, qualification, and carry. I did the math right after the contracts were announced, and it's a reasonable number. The quickest reference is Wiki, which shows 105,000 full time, sworn officers in the direct employ of federal agencies and departments.

Right. What we need to do is fire 99% of these 105,000 full time, sworn officers. Then we don't have to worry about how much practice they get.
 
Last edited:

mobiushky

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2012
Messages
830
Location
Alaska (ex-Colorado)
That means at a min you spend approx $1360 for target ammo ($17 per box of 50) or...over $4000 (hydrashok was listed at $25 for a box of 20 for a comparison) should you choose to practice with hollow-points. Even if you got a 25% discount for buying in bulk you would have still of spent over 50% more for being lazy and not training with practice ammo. So no, I'm not buying it as being cheaper to only have a contract for one type of ammo.

And really, two inventories is supposed to be hard to manage? There's sooooo many different and easy ways to do this for no additional cost that it isn't even funny.

I know the tinfoil helmets are strong right now, but think this through. Ask ANY instructor or trainer in the firearms community. ANYONE. And they will tell you if you can afford it, train with what you plan to carry. If you had unlimited funds (like say a hundred million tax payers to leech off) you would be training with those JHPs in a heart beat if you had the money. I would.

So you're approaching the "cheaper" angle wrong. It's not exactly "cheaper" to only have one contract. Its because they have no limit to their funding (remember politicians see money as unlimited) that they chose to stock the same ammo to carry and practice with. That's not unusual. Being in the military, did you practice with a different type of ammo from what you expected to carry in the field? How do you compensate for the different ballistics of the less expensive practice ammo vs the real stuff you were issued in combat?

Now I'm not trying to dowse the flames of conspiracy here. I do believe that our current administration has little qualms about murdering their own to get what they want. In the line of generations of Marxists they will "break a few eggs to make that omelet." Just think we are getting off the tracks a bit focusing on the wrong things. Setting up an order for up to 500 million rounds over the course of 10 years for ammo isn't exactly earth shattering. Look at the ones where they order 300 million to be delivered next week at undisclosed locations. That would be bothersome.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,193
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
I know the tinfoil helmets are strong right now, but think this through. Ask ANY instructor or trainer in the firearms community. ANYONE. And they will tell you if you can afford it, train with what you plan to carry. If you had unlimited funds (like say a hundred million tax payers to leech off) you would be training with those JHPs in a heart beat if you had the money. I would.

For the sake of argument, it isn't difficult to handload "target" rounds which duplicate the mass and velocity (and therefore energy and felt recoil, assuming the same powder) of your intended carry round. This being the case, there wouldn't be any reason to prefer one over the other. Even if the carry ammo were free, there would be no benefit to practicing with it. Any difference in ballistics between, say, a JHP and FMJ projectile of the same weight and at the same velocity is unlikely to be noticeable out of a handgun, especially in the context of self-defense shooting.

Rifles are different in many ways.

So you're approaching the "cheaper" angle wrong. It's not exactly "cheaper" to only have one contract. Its because they have no limit to their funding (remember politicians see money as unlimited) that they chose to stock the same ammo to carry and practice with. That's not unusual. Being in the military, did you practice with a different type of ammo from what you expected to carry in the field? How do you compensate for the different ballistics of the less expensive practice ammo vs the real stuff you were issued in combat?

However, the point is well made.
 
Last edited:

DamonK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
585
Location
Ft. Lewis, WA
Re: Democide

I'm not worried about a 10mil order here and a 500mil order there. I'm worried about the fact that in less than a year they have ordered enough ammo to fight the Iraq war at it's peek for 30 years. Oh, and the whole "most of that ammo is for practice" argument doesn't hold water since it's assuming that every officer would be practicing every single day!

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,925
Location
North Carolina
To be honest I believe that the Federal gov is doing two things, hoarding, like many other people are doing. And spending as much money as they can get away with, before the people of this country have had enough and the money tree is finally cut down, then they will not be able to buy any ammo, hence hoarding.
 
Top