War And Rumours Of War

Added to the wave of consumers’ interest in firearms in USA recently, the government’s solicitation of suppliers for immense quantities of ammunition lead one to speculate that USA is bent on uncivil war.
“An approximation of how many rounds of ammunition the DHS has now secured over the last 10 months stands at around 1.625 billion. In March 2012, ATK announced that they had agreed to provide the DHS with a maximum of 450 million bullets over four years, a story that prompted questions about why the feds were buying ammunition in such large quantities. In September last year, the federal agency purchased a further 200 million bullets.

To put that in perspective, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month. Extrapolating the figures, the DHS has purchased enough bullets over the last 10 months to wage a full scale war for almost 30 years.”
see » DHS Purchases 21.6 Million More Rounds of Ammunition Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

It’s either war or severe cuts coming at the end of the month (slide over to 4:50). What else could prompt the government to stockpile that much ammunition?

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in firearms and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to War And Rumours Of War

  1. eug says:

    Obama, ainda enxugando aquela lagriminha forçadíssima e festejadíssima que dedicou às crianças mortas de Newtown, acha horrível colocar guardas armados nas escolas, mas envia suas filhas a uma onde há pelo menos onze deles.


  2. Michael Rudas says:

    Alex Jones is such an unreliable source that if he says it, it can’t be true. He exists so that sane and knowledgeable people can point and laugh.

  3. oiaohm says:

    eug that is the problem. While you are gun on gun result of usage is death.

    We can do a lot better than result death. Kid with gun sound like a joke until you remember child solders. Just because it looks like a child does not mean there mind is not warped and will shot you without question.

    DHS personal has to be able to shoot pregant women, old men, children. Its the reality. Only way to make that non killing is give DHS another option other than a bullet gun that will stop them.

    Using this as a excuses to bear arms is stupid. Note they train shooting people with guns point to fire they fail if they shot targets without guns and with guns pointed at ground. This is fairly much global police training for equal to swat and up.

    Der Balrog yes the problem is NRA’s goons. The believe guns solve everything has undermined non-lethal weapons. Key thing is anyone who has looked into that has found what I have there are a lot of really sure to work non-lethal. They are not zero harm weapons.

    The oldest is using poised weapons. Hey its fine to drop a zebra or a big cat with a tranquilliser dart. But its not fine to drop a human with one. Yes a tranquilliser has a possibility of killing yes. Amount of physical damage is less than bullet. Next it does not really matter with a tranquilliser where you hit them as long as it gets into blood stream they will be stopping. The safest of these tranquillisers are some of the so called date rape drugs that don’t knock target out but disable muscles so completely removing targets means to fight. Effect lasts hours on target.

    Even worse is a tranquilliser could be delivered by likes of paintball. Yes there are paint-ball rounds for conventional police issue pistols. They come in red and blue and are confirmed as non lethal. Thing is they are not loaded with a tranquilliser so are completely worthless in combat. Yes too much non lethal weapon a firearm can be with modern tech. Research into non lethal rounds with stopping power for firearms needs to be done. Simplest would be nerves system disrupting toxins placed into the existing paint rounds and a new color used. Lets say white.

    Stopping power does not have to equal lead. Lead and sold projectiles is a very old fashioned way to attempt to stop enemy. Of course stopping power equal at least minor risk of killing target. Like a target hit with a toxin might react adversely so using a toxin you have to be trained how to counter it. Death management. Its a lot harder todo death management against a bullet round threw someone.

  4. Der Balrog says:

    You have to be prepared for the NRA’s goons.

  5. eug says:

    How much more evidence do you need? DHS trains to shoot pregnant women, old men, children with guns (see photos)


  6. oiaohm says:

    ram more modern combat methods are less likely to kill. Ok not that they cannot kill just less likely.

    Mace/tear gas. This is more modern than a firearm. Still can kill but less likely.

    Tazers. Again more modern than a firearm less likely to kill still can of course.

    Smoke/fog bombs. Older than firearms less likely to kill there are some modern variations on smoke and fog that tag who they have been used against. The new forms are modern weapons but the usage is the same as times of old. Better for stalling person trying to catch you than attempting to fire fight with them. These are escape assistance devices.

    Acoustic weapons with preference the directional ones. These don’t kill but person hit by one might wish they had been particularly if its a direct head hit. Effects broken ear drums just to be a kicker dislodged/damage lens in eyes. Ok target are not dead but target are fairly much rendered deaf and blind so target will not be able to target shoot anything. Old style multi directional are limited on how loud they can go before before harming the person holding them so effectively rendering them useless. Basically you want to use 220db of sound for a stopping blast. So basically twice the volume of noise a jet engine is putting out. This is more likely to render a target non effective than a bullet. Flash bangs are multi directional forms using a very bright light to make up for the lack of volume to break eyes. The damage to eyes maybe for the rest of the person life. Ears will recover mostly at least to a point you can use a hearing aid reason why freq of these weapons is choose out side speech. Yes you have lost a few freqs but they are not ones you really need.

    Electromagnetic radiation weapons. Nasty bits of work as well. They don’t harm you much. Just like medical can use Magnetic fields to suppress pain. You can do the reverse where the field can turn on every pain sensor in the target on at once. Ok its not going to kill target but that amount of pain will cause most people to pass out and drop into coma. Not dead but you might not wake up for 5+ years.
    There are a stack of other effects Electromagnetic weapons can do as well. These are not without there long term medical side effects. Just will not kill you today. You might have 50+ years ahead of you of constant suffering because a weapon like this has been used on you. But you will not be killed by one of these weapons. Just you may be wishing you were.

    Then you have optical weapons what I am surprised you don’t see combined with tazers in the lower grades. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzler_%28weapon%29
    Unfortunately the best of these is banned under UN rules. Notice the PHASR looks like a riffle. Its sniper class 1.2 km+ weapon. With the advancements laser diodes since it was made that you could fit something like a PHASR into something the size of a large hand held pistol today. What is fairly much drop you weapon or lose you vision your choice. Who wants to be in prison blind.

    Ram the modern weapons are less lethal not exactly sure if you would say they are less suffering than being shot by a gun.

    In theory you could combine optical, Electromagnetic radiation and Acoustic into 1 weapon. A combination like that would have more stopping force against humans than any gun other than the fact it will be weakened by solid objects. Please note I said weakened not stopped. Opticial is stopped by solid objects. Acoustic and Electromagnetic can shoot through solid objects with reduced effectiveness.

    So yes you could shot straight out windscreen of car straight at driver in front of you with one of these weapons and effectively disable driver of car in front of you. None of this requirement to stick arm out window to shot car in front of you so you don’t break the windscreen. With alterations to the electromagnets you could instead of targeting driver target cars engine management system.

    Ram if we got deadly serous about building a low kill modern weapon that you use like a gun the tech exists to build one and has been well tested. Yes you would have to disregard a few UN rules. The victims of these weapons are not going to like you. Maybe when we get the means to give people artificial eyes the modern weapons will be more suitable. Yes the optical will burn out artificial eyes as well.

    There is one big problem these modern style weapons don’t take ammo. They take rechargeable batteries. This effectively kills the ammo industry. Other problem is they could be like 600+ shots a charge.

    So not more deadly. Able to cause larger problems. 600+ harmed but not dead is in fact a harder problem to deal with than 600 dead.

  7. ram says:

    ‘Modern’ firearms really consist of technology that is a century old. Banning firearms tends to encourage the population to look toward more modern solutions to arming themselves. Those modern solutions are very likely to be far more deadly than century old firearms technology.

  8. oiaohm says:

    eug the Fed admit basically says do Australian gun laws. Australian gun laws cover the clips and magazines.

    assault weapons with a 5 shot clip are not major human killers. Assault weapons with 50 shot clips on the other hand are a risk.

    Biggest cause of robberies is how a lot of shops operate in Australia at the moment. Solo young person in shop at night without weapon training. This kinda does invite rob them.

    Crime control is not only remove the weapons from criminals there also needs to be some mirror laws on employers. Right you cannot leave a person solo in a store that is not trained to protect self and the store has no build in defence system. This is still a weakness Australia has.

    Most robberies here don’t use guns. Don’t say give shop keeper gun its not required. Exploding paint packs in tills effective allowing the money in the store to be rendered useless in case of robbery. Security screens for register operators, fog generators…

    This was implemented in many of our service stations. Those service stations have zero robberies. No one is dumb enough to attempt to steal what cannot be stolen more than once.

    Fog generators are particularly effective. Completely no lethal and if you set it of by mistake you can laugh with anyone effected they might be mad with you but they are alive. No criminal wants to be stuck in the store while police are coming.

    Fog generators can be used in any closed space. Fog generators are many times more effective than sirens.

    Reduce crime is not just remove guns. Reduce crime requires bringing in the range of non lethal weapons.

    There is a reason for using non lethal. A person who is in real hell might think they have nothing to lose so life is no an issue. Being taken alive and made to suffer for many years is a nice deterrent.

  9. oiaohm says:

    Robert Pogson
    “Hmmm… Recently I was firing some ammunition that had a date of 1961. Zero misfires. Good accuracy.”

    Note what I said. 10 years to be sure they will fire quickly. Two possible miss fire causes. Primers and propellant. . Old well stored propellant is good for a very long time. Yes bad storage of propellant is major cause if miss files.

    Problem here is responsiveness of Primers drop with age. Depending on chemical mix of primers depend on what happens.

    Storage requirements are cool and dry. Its both with primers. Robert Pogson where you are you don’t have the issue with cool I would guess.

    Yes big problem is all types of primers degrade when exposed to heat. Also fast fire primers are not as stable as there slower relations.

    1970 lead styphnate (picrate) chemistry or basically current day primers. At the age you mention 40 years hang fire primers will have mostly gone completely dead. Production wise there is most likely no difference between the ones that still fire perfectly 40 years latter and those that don’t 40 years latter. In fact moisture exposure does not have to be a cause. Can be like the one side of the box that got warm.

    When you have someone shotting at you to kill you. You don’t want a miss fire or a hang fire.

    –“Effective life bullets sure to fire fast stored correctly is 10 years.”–
    This statement allows for even stored correctly there can be minor errors. Like unable for some reason to get boxes quickly in cool storage. Degrading is basically a fact of life.

    Basically Robert Pogson as a police officer would you want to be betting your life that ammo has had perfect storage and is still fine 30 years latter. Not really. Minor errors in storage quickly shorten the effective life. Effective life if correctly stored is over 100 years. Most bullets are not correctly stored. 194x power is fine as long as it correctly stored until about 2040. Over 100 years. Is also true of modern day primer chemistry correctly stored.

    The reality here Effective Life of ammo is very rarely achieved it is always shortened by storage issues. 100 percent dependable life almost no matter how bad you have treated for mil water proofed the ammo is 10 years.

    Treat you ammo really well yes its possible to get 100 years out of it.

    The issue here Robert Pogson is looking at the box how do you tell if it been stored perfectly or something has gone wrong. Yes something I find completely stupid with fruit and veg you place tracking sensors that react to know how far the life span has been shortened.

    Yes the safe rapid fire dependability could be extended past 10 years if the way ammo was packaged was changed to track incorrect environment exposures.

  10. Ivan says:

    Why don’t you start raving about lizard men from Betelgeuse and their controlling interest in the Illuminati, Bob.

    You’ve linked to Alex Jones, you might as well go all in.

  11. eug says:

    February 19, 2013

    In written responses to questions submitted by the Senate Intelligence Committee, John Brennan, the Obama administration’s nominee for director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), refused to rule out drone assassinations of American citizens on US soil. The committee on Friday released a declassified version of Brennan’s responses.

    Brennan, currently President Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser, is the architect and director of the program of drone missile assassinations that is run out of the White House with the personal participation of Obama. Asked squarely, “Could the Administration carry out drone strikes inside the United States?” Brennan replied, “This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so.”

    This is what is known as a non-responsive answer. It is reasonable to assume that if the answer was “no,” Brennan would simply have written, “no.” Instead, in order to avoid a giving straightforward “yes,” he answered a different question than the one that was asked.

    Brennan’s answers to the written questions make clear that there was nothing accidental about his refusal to rule out drone assassinations within the United States at his February 7 confirmation hearing before the Senate committee. It was, rather, an expression of a deliberate policy adopted by the Obama White House and the military/intelligence agencies.



  12. oiaohm wrote, “Effective life bullets sure to fire fast stored correctly is 10 years.”

    Hmmm… Recently I was firing some ammunition that had a date of 1961. Zero misfires. Good accuracy.

    Properly made ammunition will last indefinitely. One can make ammunition in which the propellant decays and auto-catalyzes further decay but good manufacturers use a base to neutralize acids and the stuff can last a very long time. Powder in a cartridge is hermetically sealed in military ammunition so that air/water don’t affect the propellant. Sealed in a case to keep water and dirt off the outside of the cartridges keeps the rounds bright, too.

    I made some ammunition in the 1970s which was finally fired in the 201x period using powder which was already old, probably 194x. We did have a few misfires but no hangfires with it. So, ammunition can be stored 70 years or more and still be useful.

  13. oiaohm says:

    Der Balrog The Australian Bush most of the threats guns are not much use. The snake that bites you will be the one you did not see and you stepped on it. The spider that bit you will be about same. Some of the Australian toxic plants will be the same.

    Salt water crocs and pigs are about the only ones a gun will be any form of usage. Even then you will not be needing huge number of rounds and you will want fast firing rounds.

    Der Balrog the important thing here is older the ammo the more likely it will hang fire. Not good in a gun fight to have the slower shooting gun because the bullet primer slow to activate.

    Effective life bullets sure to fire fast stored correctly is 10 years. Note I am not saying the bullet over 10 years old will not fire. Yes it will fire it just will have hang issues on some rounds. Yes there are some classic of people using old ammo with the hang fire be long enough to look down barrel before it decides to fire. So yes long enough that the guy shotting at you with good ammo has killed you.

    Most of those acquirement contracts are 4 year contracts. So max of 14 years before they should be all used. Maybe they are going to serous-ally go head to head with gang land violence.

  14. bw says:

    “What else could prompt the government to stockpile that much ammunition”

    Given the conspiratorial bent of those who post around here, I should think that you could come up with deeper games than that. For one thing, wars are to be fought in the Obama era as much with bullets as with stealthy things that, like Zeus, strike out of the blue. If the government were stockpiling Hellfire missiles for drone armament, you might infer some new initiative in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or even Syria.

    But bullets fall short of that mark. Perhaps with such gigantic purchases, the US government is trying to exhaust the supply of such ammunition and gobble up the total industry output, storing it safely away in obscure warehouses where it can be kept out of the hands of gun nuts. An even deeper game might be and attempt to totally warp the distribution chain of ammunition supplies and then abruptly cease contracts entirely, leaving the manufacturers with no choice but imminent bankruptcy. The government could then buy up all the manufacturing facilities for even less expenditures, saving the taxpayer’s a bundle.

    The stockpiled ammo, good as you say for many decades of use by law enforcement agencies, would be available to legitimate agencies and denied to citizens who could not pass some sort of screening. The die-hards who might load their own would be thwarted by a corresponding shortage of gunpowder and primer parts.

    Overall, an excellent plan!

  15. Der Balrog says:

    What else could prompt the government to stockpile that much ammunition?

    Zombies? Snakes? The Australian bush?

Leave a Reply