View Single Post
Old 11-29-2012, 12:49   #40
Kelo6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatman View Post
Another poster did a rough calculation (I think it was on this forum) about the number of people trained at FLETC. There are a lot of rounds being put down range for training purposes.

That is correct. Check out Post #10 of this thread here:
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/show...&highlight=dhs


Quote:
Originally Posted by NewCop761

I qualify quarterly. (For those of you alarmed by the article, that means FOUR times each year.)

Between qualification and training I shoot about 200 - 250 rounds on a training day.
That means I use about 1,000 rounds of .40 a year. Contrary to the linked article, we only shoot our carry ammo. Wasteful, yeah I think so, but that's how we do it.

CJStudent already mentioned FLETC. He didn't mention that there are several FLETC locations:
FLETC Glynco
FLETC Artesia
FLETC Charleston
FLETC Cheltenham
FLETC International (Hungary, Thailand, Botswana, and El Salvador)

On top of that here are the majority of gun-toters that fall under the umbrella of DHS. This doesn't include DHS-OIG and I didn't include the U.S. Coast Guard. I know they carry the Sig P229 in .40 also.

8,500 Special Agents HSI
7,000 Deportation Officers & Immigration Enforcement Agents
21,370 Border Patrol agents
21,186 CBP Officers
4,400 +/- Secret Service Special Agents + Uniformed Divison
???? Federal Air Marshals
And Post #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-1
I am at a loss as to what the problem is.

At my agency, each officer shoots 50 rounds per month at the range and qualifies once per quarter. On top of that, each officer probably shoot another 100 round per year practicing new drills. That comes out to 700 rounds per officer, per year. We shoot the same ammo at the range as we shoot in the field for reasons of civil liability. This way if someone sues us over an officer involved shooting, their lawyer can't claim we were unfamiliar with the characteristics of our duty ammo because we only shoot ball at the range.

I am going to assume the Fed follow a similar protocol. The article says the Feds bought 40,220,000 rounds. By my agency's standards that's enough annual practice ammo for 54,457 officers. So how many cops do the Feds have? Let's count -

8,500 Special Agents HSI
7,000 Deportation Officers & Immigration Enforcement Agents
21,370 Border Patrol agents
21,186 CBP Officers
4,400 +/- Secret Service Special Agents + Uniformed Division
295 Social Security Special Agents

Total 62,751

I'm sure there are a lot more, but lets just go with these.

62,751 Feds X 700 rounds per year = 43,925,700 rounds needed

OOPS. It looks like the Feds didn't order enough ammo for everyone to practice monthly at the range over the next fiscal year. They are either going to have to order 3,705,700 more rounds, or someone is going to have to skip going to the range, or they are going to have to stop shooting bad guys in the field.

Based on what the federal agents on this very forum are saying, it doesn't look like DHS ordered enough!


[quote=expatman;19643898]Also, the contract for ammo IIRC was for "up to" a certain amount over a 5 year period, not all at once. This is very common for govt. contract with everything from bullets to boots. It leaves the requesting entity the ability to cut short the quantity at some point if they find that they no longer need the full amount.[QUOTE]


I also believe that to be true, but regardless, they still don't have enough ammo for everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by expatman View Post
Finally, in my opinion, why would a govt. agency only be ordering pistol ammo if they were planning on shooting or rounding up civilians? It does not make sense to me. When was the last time you saw any LEO in a tactical situation with just a sidearm? They always have long guns when they expect trouble. If they are intending on using that amount of ammo then that would be expecting trouble and pistols are simply not enough. Where are the rifle ammo contracts?

Why did the report not address any of the issues that I have brought up? I think the answer to that is because they want to stir up emotions and draw attention to their product (their news broadcasts and websites)
Exactly!

I am actually MORE worried about an economic collapse and rioting and pillaging than I am about a weapons seizure. Although after the rioting, the government will probably try. Assuming the government still has any effective control at all.


With the number of unregistered weapons out there, the government will have to steam-roll across the US to take control. Which I wouldn't put past a totalitarian government, but if that's the case, my little .223 rifles aren't going to do jack against tanks/APCs and a couple hundred (or thousand) guys.

Unless I have a couple of my own tanks (or some brave guys with rocket launchers and/or explosives) and a couple hundred of my own guys,

I will have bigger things to worry about. Like hiding out until they pass by.
Kelo6 is offline   Reply With Quote