Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: DHS using roughly 1,000 rounds of ammunition more per person than the U.S. Army

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    sparta ky
    Posts
    251

    DHS using roughly 1,000 rounds of ammunition more per person than the U.S. Army

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...r-person-than/



    That's around 32 rounds per week per LEO! What other LE agency does that?
    Does the DHS really have 70,000 armed field agents?
    DHS includes the USCG and when I was in we used about 50 to 100 rounds of 40cal every 6 months.
    If you qualify the 1st time 50 2nd time 100.
    Counting pistol, M16, shotgun and M240(once per year) I don't think I fired more than 500 rds per year.
    I don't believe these numbers include the Guard we got some if not all of our ammo from DOD.
    Numbers just don't add up



    Mike

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Man it looks like I went into the wrong branch of the military if I wanted to be properly trained. And they get to do their training with JHPs instead of the ball or frangible rounds that I have to use.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Lessee....1.6 billion rounds divided by 300-odd million folks in the US....that's about 5 rounds per person....yep, that'll keep us in line!

  4. #4
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95
    Lessee... 1.6 billion rounds divided by 300-odd million folks in the US... that's about 5 rounds per person... yep, that'll keep us in line!
    Under stress, that's 2-3 shots that land. Enough for a failure drill.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    Man it looks like I went into the wrong branch of the military if I wanted to be properly trained. And they get to do their training with JHPs instead of the ball or frangible rounds that I have to use.
    I don't care too much about the amount purchased as I do not know their plan for its use. Their excuse of it being a multi-year deal may be legit, I'm just not sure. Point being is that I could see a logical reason being produced for this remarkably large purchase.

    What I cannot get over, however, is their choice of purchasing JHP's. My understanding is the JHP's are prohibited from being used by the military due to some international agreement. The question I want answered is, "Whom does DHS expect to need to use JHP's against and why purchase JHP's over FMJ's while we're in this awful economic state?" I'm honestly nervous to hear/learn the true answer to that question.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Lessee....1.6 billion rounds divided by 300-odd million folks in the US....that's about 5 rounds per person....yep, that'll keep us in line!
    Maybe they intend on gluing them all together and rolling the large ball over us thereby squishing us.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceman7496 View Post
    I don't care too much about the amount purchased as I do not know their plan for its use. Their excuse of it being a multi-year deal may be legit, I'm just not sure. Point being is that I could see a logical reason being produced for this remarkably large purchase.

    What I cannot get over, however, is their choice of purchasing JHP's. My understanding is the JHP's are prohibited from being used by the military due to some international agreement. The question I want answered is, "Whom does DHS expect to need to use JHP's against and why purchase JHP's over FMJ's while we're in this awful economic state?" I'm honestly nervous to hear/learn the true answer to that question.
    Read the article again. They (the DHS) are using 1300-1600 rounds per officer PER YEAR compared to the ~350 rounds used per soldier per year in the Army. Also in the article they state that the DHS uses ~100+MILLION rounds a year on it's 70,000 officers (which is how they figured out how many rounds-per-officer were used per year). Now I don't know about you, but I haven't heard of any open wars on our streets. This means that they are either using those 100+million rounds of JHP for training or they are siphoning them off and giving them to other agencies improperly. You will also notice that the DHS doesn't refute the amount of rounds-per-officer being used. So no, I wouldn't say that their multi-year deal is "legit" because they only "need" so many rounds because of how many rounds their officers get to use per year. If they used the 350 rounds like the Army then they would only need 24.5m a year and not the 100m+ that they currently use.

    Oh and a little note. The AF only uses 90rds to qualify on the handgun (45 practice and 45 to qual). Even in the arming group that requires you to qual every 6 months that is only 180 rounds a year. Now when we qual on the M4/M16 it's ~200 rounds but not everyone qualifies on that and you need even fewer civilian officers (preferably no officers) qual'd on assault rifles. And that Army number appears to be their total rounds used across all weapons. So really the amount of rounds needed to keep someone current on just a pistol are far less than that 350 number.

    Moving on to the JHPs, the military can't use JHPs against "enemy combatants" due to the Hague Convention. The military can (and does) use JHPs for stateside base defense where the use is in civilian policing and not against invading enemy combatants. Also note that depending on the range, some bases use frangible rounds instead of actual ball ammo as it helps save the range due to their design (always funny when someone hits the metal bar holding their target causing the round to disentigrate and take the head off of the target from the bullet shrapnel). Frangible rounds are more expensive than ball, but cheaper than JHPs. I'm not against officers using JHPs in their duty guns (though I do question why they have 70k officers), the issue is using them for training instead of cheaper ammo for training.

    As for why purchase JHPs over FMJ/frangible rounds, it's because it's just monopoly money and there's no real accountability for them. Which is also probably why they get to shoot so much as well. I mean if you weren't footing the bill and wouldn't get in trouble for doing so, would you turn down the chance to go to the range?
    Last edited by Aknazer; 04-26-2013 at 01:10 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bothell
    Posts
    586
    Stockpiling? Sure. What for? Border wars? Civil unrest?

    Let's look at who the DHS oversees and would be using these billions and billions of rounds:

    Agencies
    Transportation Security Administration
    Customs and Border Protection
    Citizenship and Immigration Services
    Immigration and Customs Enforcement
    United States Coast Guard
    Federal Emergency Management Agency
    United States Secret Service

    Divisions
    DHS National Protection and Programs Directorate
    DHS Science and Technology Directorate
    DHS Management Directorate
    DHS Office of Policy
    DHS Office of Health Affairs
    DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis
    DHS Office of Operations Coordination
    Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
    Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

  9. #9
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,275
    I wasn't too concerned until I saw what took place in Boston, they clearly used Boston for training. I dismissed it at first but I now believe we have dark days in store for us.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  10. #10
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    There could be another angle to this too. Remember Iran/Contra affair. These rounds might be making it to foreign nations or groups that the government doesn't want us to know it's supplying.......just a thought I had.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  11. #11
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    There could be another angle to this too. Remember Iran/Contra affair. These rounds might be making it to foreign nations or groups that the government doesn't want us to know it's supplying.......just a thought I had.
    for some reason I keep thinking of the Stargate Program. SG-1 sure could run through some ammo.
    President/ Founding Member
    Louisiana Open Carry Awareness League
    www.laopencarry.org

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by sraacke View Post
    for some reason I keep thinking of the Stargate Program. SG-1 sure could run through some ammo.
    Because our bullets work so well against technologically advanced aliens!
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Because our bullets work so well against technologically advanced aliens!
    Hey didn't you see that one episode where they basically said that one of humanity's advantagez is that everyone else is so advanced that they forget to think stupid and only account for other technology on their level. So our bullets do work in the right situatuons!

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Maybe they are getting marksmanship training from the NYPD...in that case, they don't have ENOUGH ammo.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098
    So, the problem here seems to be that the military isn't being trained well enough in shooting skills. As a 22+ year member of the USAF, I can vouch for that fact....

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by PavePusher View Post
    So, the problem here seems to be that the military isn't being trained well enough in shooting skills. As a 22+ year member of the USAF, I can vouch for that fact....
    And yet the military does a far better job at not just indiscriminately shooting people and at hitting what they shoot at (when it isn't just suppressive fire). Sounds like the DHS needs to train less.

  17. #17
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by PavePusher View Post
    So, the problem here seems to be that the military isn't being trained well enough in shooting skills. As a 22+ year member of the USAF, I can vouch for that fact....
    18 years in the Corps and qualified on the M16 a grand total of THREE times......the 45 ONCE and the M9 TWICE. I got to shoot more than that but not for quals, just "fun". If it weren't for my personal shooting I'd have been at a severe disadvantage.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    And yet the military does a far better job at not just indiscriminately shooting people and at hitting what they shoot at (when it isn't just suppressive fire). Sounds like the DHS needs to train less.
    The rounds of ammo per death in military combat is not one to one lol

    In Korea it was about 50K to 1 .. in Vietnam it was about 1 million to one

  19. #19
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The rounds of ammo per death in military combat is not one to one lol

    In Korea it was about 50K to 1 .. in Vietnam it was about 1 million to one
    The number I've long used, after having seen it somewhere years ago, is 57,000 rounds of small arms fire expended for every casualty inflicted in VietNam and not all casualties result in death. Injury is all that is required to be a casualty. Where did you find the 1 million per death figure?
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    The number I've long used, after having seen it somewhere years ago, is 57,000 rounds of small arms fire expended for every casualty inflicted in VietNam and not all casualties result in death. Injury is all that is required to be a casualty. Where did you find the 1 million per death figure?
    http://jonathanturley.org/2011/01/10...urgent-killed/

    Saw a history documentary discussing rifles used in Korea and Vietnam ... here's a GAO figure for more recent events (250,000 rds/kill)... the 1 mil/kill does not sound implausible.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 04-29-2013 at 02:51 PM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The rounds of ammo per death in military combat is not one to one lol

    In Korea it was about 50K to 1 .. in Vietnam it was about 1 million to one
    I never said it was a 1:1 ratio. I said that the military does better when they aren't using said ammo for suppression and that they are far less likely to hit innocent bystanders. I am well aware that the majority of ammo used in a war doesn't result in a casuality. But I also know that the majority of this ammo is used to make the enemy keep their head down and be unable to return fire.

Posting Permissions

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