Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: AZRedhawk44 on March 04, 2013, 10:15:08 AM
-
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/obama-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks-to-go-with-their-1-6-billion-bullet-stockpile/
2700 light-armored tanks.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2-ps.googleusercontent.com%2Fh%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2F488x325xhomeland-security-mrap.jpg.pagespeed.ic.tN6C46J1W4.jpg&hash=f8efe5105ab0aecf6de9c9a8b892684f7e3e69b3)
They're obviously not being used on our southern border... where will they be used?
Local law enforcement already has a standing tradition of using National Guard resources when really bad thing start happening.
2700 of these things comes out to about 54 units per State.
Why does DHS need 50 tanks per State in the Union?
-
Aren't those things about a million bucks a pop?
-
There's no such thing as a "light armored tank" with four wheels and without a main gun.
Just sayin
-
Additionally, the linked "source" says this.
The installation contract retrofits 2,717 vintage MaxxPro vehicles
Retrofit, not new purchase. Probably of existing vehicles being signed over to HSI and CPB by the Army.
Any sources on this other than nut-o-blogs?
I certainly haven't seen anything come across my desk about it. And one of our pieces of work is to provide BFT support for vehicle assets for DHS...
-
I'm honestly scratching my head at the "Why?" It is less useful than some Suburbans, some box trucks, etc. It can go less places and will draw a lot more notice when it does. You can't exactly be discreet in one, and it can't go a lot of places normal cars can. It's not what you'd want to use for patrolling, or even most responses to stuff in the field. It's pretty rare you need even one of these. Armored tactical cars here in the US spend the majority of their time gathering dust. Maybe 5% of their use is on training and maybe .01% is being necessary.
Seriously. Those are going to waste away in warehouses unless DHS has been listening to too many Alex Jones radio shows and is about to play a major prank on him.
Even 54 of them per state is too low for oppressing the people. If locals have a long convoluted path to get access to them, they're not going to call when they need one for say a hostage situation. These are going to be stuck in some motor pool, and be used as props AFTER a mass disaster, shooting or other media event. So, very expensive billboards for DHS?
-
I'm honestly scratching my head at the "Why?" It is less useful than some Suburbans, some box trucks, etc. It can go less places and will draw a lot more notice when it does. You can't exactly be discreet in one, and it can't go a lot of places normal cars can. It's not what you'd want to use for patrolling, or even most responses to stuff in the field. It's pretty rare you need even one of these. Armored tactical cars here in the US spend the majority of their time gathering dust. Maybe 5% of their use is on training and maybe .01% is being necessary.
Seriously. Those are going to waste away in warehouses unless DHS has been listening to too many Alex Jones radio shows and is about to play a major prank on him.
Even 54 of them per state is too low for oppressing the people. If locals have a long convoluted path to get access to them, they're not going to call when they need one for say a hostage situation. These are going to be stuck in some motor pool, and be used as props AFTER a mass disaster, shooting or other media event. So, very expensive billboards for DHS?
I wonder why as well... But I'm thinking with the wars winding down (and the MRAP's utility outside of a police action is questionable at best,) they're probably getting them EXTREMELY cheap.
I also don't even think this is a credible source. Again, i've heard NOTHING official about large MRAP purchases by DHS.
I'd love to see a ton of these on the southern border.
EDIT: the video doesn't say anything about 2700
Are we sure this isn't something like a long term contract to retrofit?
-
Seems like a legitimate Border PAtrol or SWAT vehicle.
-
Putting HSI as a direct report to DHS was a PR mistake.
HSI's primary missions are in support of CPB/ICE.
Human trafficking, weapons smuggling. Also, some elements of nuke/critical infrastructure security fall under them.
Recently, those dastardly stormtroopers busted a human smuggling ring up here on the northern border (using some of the systems i work on to plan/coordinate the op). THose brave patriots arrested by the jackbooted thugs at HSI included 80 or so indonesians who were simply trying to smuggle little girls into the country for sale into the sex trade.
Stupid HSI.
Also recently, my system was used to set up a mobile command post for a counter drug op that netted 17 million dollars in MJ.
I believe in legalization, and was a bit morally disturbed by the thought of busting a grower. Then I found out that the grower had smuggled in illegal immigrants and weapons to protect their fields.
-
I wonder why as well... But I'm thinking with the wars winding down (and the MRAP's utility outside of a police action is questionable at best,) they're probably getting them EXTREMELY cheap.
I also don't even think this is a credible source. Again, i've heard NOTHING official about large MRAP purchases by DHS.
I'd love to see a ton of these on the southern border.
EDIT: the video doesn't say anything about 2700
Are we sure this isn't something like a long term contract to retrofit?
Could be DRMS, yea. Lot of police agencies got M113's the same way. That's the only thing that makes sense. "Hey, want 2k MRAPs for $1? You pay shipping costs."
-
Could be DRMS, yea. Lot of police agencies got M113's the same way. That's the only thing that makes sense. "Hey, want 2k MRAPs for $1? You pay shipping costs."
I'll ask around.
One of the reasons I like working here is that if teh st00pidz ever DOES come, I'll be in a position to know about it early
-
Retrofit, not new purchase. Probably of existing vehicles being signed over to HSI and CPB by the Army.
Given the above, one has to wonder how much of this is because they needed them for something, versus some middle manager with a hard on for hardware getting them just because they look cool.
Interagency transfers like this are often $1 a pop, and some people can't pass up "the deal" regardless of how useful, or not, the equipment is. Stuff like this and DRMO is like Home Shopping Network for the .gov. Lots of people addicted to getting stuff just because they can.
Edit: Rev beat me too it.
-
Given the above, one has to wonder how much of this is because they needed them for something, versus some middle manager with a hard on for hardware getting them just because they look cool.
Interagency transfers like this are often $1 a pop, and some people can't pass up "the deal" regardless of how useful, or not, the equipment is. Stuff like this and DRMO is like Home Shopping Network for the .gov. Lots of people addicted to getting stuff just because they can.
Edit: Rev beat me too it.
Additionally, when parts are "full price," often it's cheaper to transfer entire vehicles for parts needs. There's a high probability that a huge chunk of any such vehicle purchase would be prepped for storage and used for spare parts.
-
The vehicles are simply going to be pre-positioned for the use of the UN troops from Pakistan, Cuba, Iran, and North Korea which Obama is planning to invite in to execute house-to-house searches for contraband guns as they enforce the UN Arms Control treaty in North America.
[tinfoil]
-
I'll ask around.
One of the reasons I like working here is that if teh st00pidz ever DOES come, I'll be in a position to know about it early
Do us a favor,. will ya? ;)
-
Do us a favor,. will ya? ;)
There are many reasons why I plan to keep this job...
-
There's no such thing as a "light armored tank" with four wheels and without a main gun.
Just sayin
*nods*
Anything with appreciable armor and wheels is properly an "Armored Car."
Now here's a question for the elephant in the room: Yes, police types do sometimes need an armored car to protect themselves from boolets-from-badguys(tm). But why are they obtaining vehicles expressly designed to survive Improvised Explosive Devices and Rocket Propelled Grenades?
-
*nods*
Anything with appreciable armor and wheels is properly an "Armored Car."
Now here's a question for the elephant in the room: Yes, police types do sometimes need an armored car to protect themselves from boolets-from-badguys(tm). But why are they obtaining vehicles expressly designed to survive Improvised Explosive Devices and Rocket Propelled Grenades?
Because they're likely cheap, and just because it's good at one thing doesn't mean it won't be good at another.
Don't we make the argument about guns all the time? After all, an AR15 was "designed" for the US Armed forces. It's good for many uses other than killing the marauding commie hordes.
The MRAP is pretty good at defending folks from lightly armed, small ragtag groups of bad guys in an arid desert climate.
Can't imagine why HSI or CPB would want that...
-
Things like this (militarization of the police force) demonstrate exactly why the 2A should not be limited to semiautomatic-only, .50 caliber or smaller, non-explosive munitions.
In other words, if I can't disable the vehicle with 1 well aimed shot (using what I own in my safe) EXACTLY like David Lamson did to a British occupation force ammunition wagon in 18th century Massachusetts... it's too much for police to have and I object to it.
[exit stage right, muttering something unintelligible about Arduinos, rockets, thermite and javelins...]
>:D
-
Things like this (militarization of the police force) demonstrate exactly why the 2A should not be limited to semiautomatic-only, .50 caliber or smaller, non-explosive munitions.
In other words, if I can't disable the vehicle with 1 well aimed shot (using what I own in my safe) EXACTLY like David Lamson did to a British occupation force ammunition wagon in 18th century Massachusetts... it's too much for police to have and I object to it.
[exit stage right, muttering something unintelligible about Arduinos, rockets, thermite and javelins...]
>:D
An EFP can and will punch through an MRAP
And, i'd wager you're smarter than the average insurgent.
-
Because they're likely cheap, and just because it's good at one thing doesn't mean it won't be good at another.
Don't we make the argument about guns all the time?
The MRAP is pretty good at defending folks from lightly armed, small ragtag groups of bad guys in an arid desert climate.
Can't imagine why HSI or CPB would want that...
Their construction makes them inherently dangerous to drive, prone to roll-over and brake failure type accidents. Collateral (read civilian) damage and casualties from these sorts of accidents in crowded urban and suburban areas will be substantially higher than, say, an up-armored suburban.*
Their size precludes them from a certain amount of maneuverability making it difficult to impossible to employ them in the tight confines often encountered urban or other built-up areas.
Their excessive weight precludes them from use on many roads due to damage to the paving or the utilities beneath.
The height and limited view through the armored windows makes it much more difficult for the drivers to see if there are people immediately adjacent to/in front of/behind the vehicle and will increase the danger of accidentally running over a pedestrian or a non-ambulatory or otherwise incapacitated person.
Certain parts subject to aging effects, such as tires, can not be effectively salvaged from extra vehicles and themselves carry substantial cost. The Michelin XZL tires for instance run about $1,000 each.
Due to their weight these vehicles suffer break-downs at a substantially higher rate than smaller vehicles that could fulfill a comparative role, hence the salvage supply of spare parts will be exhausted at an expedited rate at which point sourcing spares will become a much more expensive prospect.
Drivers of these vehicles require extensive additional training and then practical experience in the vehicle which equates to substantially increased costs. The time needed behind the wheel to become proficient drivers will obviate attempts to prevent vehicle wear through lack-of-use (and one must ask, what point is the vehicle if you're intentionally not using it to avoid maintenance costs?)
*As I recall the Army does not allow MRAP's to be operated on U.S. highways due to the increased danger they present. Instead they are shipped by low-rider semi-truck to the training facilities and back again. In contrast, the Stryker Armored Car is not restricted from the highways.
And finally, the ultimate reason: Because the police shouldn't have access to anything that isn't available to a private citizen.
-
Let me start with I really don't think there's an evil plot to arm up our police forces to supress the citizenry and install tyranny. If there was we would know because there's no way the fed.gov could keep that a secret.
but......
If there is going to be an American Stazi coming for us in the night I'm kind of glad they're useing vehicles that many Americans are familiar with, have used and know all the weaknesses.
Just sayin'......I can frak up an MRAP's wholesale.....whereas if they bought surplus BTR-90's I wouldn't know where to start.
-
Let me start with I really don't think there's an evil plot to arm up our police forces to supress the citizenry and install tyranny. If there was we would know because there's no way the fed.gov could keep that a secret.
but......
If there is going to be an American Stazi coming for us in the night I'm kind of glad they're useing vehicles that many Americans are familiar with, have used and know all the weaknesses.
Just sayin'......I can frak up an MRAP's wholesale.....whereas if they bought surplus BTR-90's I wouldn't know where to start.
As Fitz mentioned, EFP's are kinda a one-size-fits-all solution for armored threats. ;)
-
Their construction makes them inherently dangerous to drive, prone to roll-over and brake failure type accidents. Collateral (read civilian) damage and casualties from these sorts of accidents in crowded urban and suburban areas will be substantially higher than, say, an up-armored suburban.*
Their size precludes them from a certain amount of maneuverability making it difficult to impossible to employ them in the tight confines often encountered urban or other built-up areas.
Their excessive weight precludes them from use on many roads due to damage to the paving or the utilities beneath.
The height and limited view through the armored windows makes it much more difficult for the drivers to see if there are people immediately adjacent to/in front of/behind the vehicle and will increase the danger of accidentally running over a pedestrian or a non-ambulatory or otherwise incapacitated person.
Certain parts subject to aging effects, such as tires, can not be effectively salvaged from extra vehicles and themselves carry substantial cost. The Michelin XZL tires for instance run about $1,000 each.
Due to their weight these vehicles suffer break-downs at a substantially higher rate than smaller vehicles that could fulfill a comparative role, hence the salvage supply of spare parts will be exhausted at an expedited rate at which point sourcing spares will become a much more expensive prospect.
Drivers of these vehicles require extensive additional training and then practical experience in the vehicle which equates to substantially increased costs. The time needed behind the wheel to become proficient drivers will obviate attempts to prevent vehicle wear through lack-of-use (and one must ask, what point is the vehicle if you're intentionally not using it to avoid maintenance costs?)
*As I recall the Army does not allow MRAP's to be operated on U.S. highways due to the increased danger they present. Instead they are shipped by low-rider semi-truck to the training facilities and back again. In contrast, the Stryker Armored Car is not restricted from the highways.
Sure, all this is true. I'd wager they'd still be usable along the border.
At worst, this is simply a dumb dumb purchase. I don't attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.
As to the above stuff, i'll just say this. We now have almost 13 years of PROOF that a small group of folks with rifles and improvised explosives can Eff up the best the US Army has to offer.
I also suspect that, in such a SHTF scenario, a lot of army material would be looted and used.
-
"We don't need military style things on our streets" was the quote, I think. You can correct me but that is the jist of it.
-
As Fitz mentioned, EFP's are kinda a one-size-fits-all solution for armored threats. ;)
I've seen friggin ABRAMS TANKS with holes in em from EFPs. One in particular, no one survived.
Not a whole lot to do about an EFP but pray for the dart not forming correctly, or a bungled initiator
-
"We don't need military style things on our streets" was the quote, I think. You can correct me but that is the jist of it.
Again, HSI's primary duty relates to support of CPB.
I , and many of the people on this board IIRC, have NEVER objected to military hardware being used for border security. In fact, many on this board have advocated more drastic measures than some armored trucks of questionable utility
-
Sure, all this is true. I'd wager they'd still be usable along the border.
...
On a border where there has been a demonstrated threat of RPG's and anti-material rifles, they'd be an outstanding resource (but still expensive to maintain and operate). My eye-brow goes up though when I see them rolling along I-70 here in Denver. And I have.
-
As Fitz mentioned, EFP's are kinda a one-size-fits-all solution for armored threats. ;)
Yeah, but you can stop an MRAP waaay easier then building an EFP.
As to the above stuff, i'll just say this. We now have almost 13 years of PROOF that a small group of folks with rifles and improvised explosives can Eff up the best the US Army has to offer.
This. I've said several times that the .gov would have to be suicidally stupid to let it go all Alliance v. Browncoats with several thousands of folk that have spent the last decade getting what amounts to a graduate degree in insurgency.
-
On a border where there has been a demonstrated threat of RPG's and anti-material rifles, they'd be an outstanding resource (but still expensive to maintain and operate). My eye-brow goes up though when I see them rolling along I-70 here in Denver. And I have.
You saw CPB/HSI/DHS/WTFBBQ branded MRAPs rolling down i70 in denver?
Are you sure they weren't guard assets?
http://world.time.com/2012/10/25/mexicos-drug-lords-ramp-up-their-arsenals-with-rpgs/
I suppose when the first RPG or 50 cal rifle is shot at a texas rancher instead of just a regular gun, it'll be ok?
We're expressing outrage over an agency involved in border security (and nuke/infrastructure security) buying armored vehicles. Would it be better if the US military handled those missions?
-
You saw CPB/HSI/DHS/WTFBBQ branded MRAPs rolling down i70 in denver?
Are you sure they weren't guard assets?
DHS, solid tan, I-70 west-bound between I-25 and I-270. 4x4, similar to an RG-32.
ETA: Fitz, go back and read my previous post. :P
Also, yes, I'd say the military would be appropriate on the Mexican border. We've done a better job securing the Afghanistan/Pakistan border than Border Patrol has ever done on the Mexican/American border.
-
DHS, solid tan, I-70 west-bound between I-25 and I-270. 4x4, similar to an RG-32.
That's interesting.
I wonder what it was doing there.
I'll ask the HSI guys what kinds of missions their colorado assets have.
Will report back tomorrow
-
That's interesting.
I wonder what it was doing there.
I'll ask the HSI guys what kinds of missions their colorado assets have.
Will report back tomorrow
They could tell you... but then they'd have to kill you. [tinfoil]
We'll know if Fitz gets told tomorrow or not. :laugh:
-
DHS, solid tan, I-70 west-bound between I-25 and I-270. 4x4, similar to an RG-32.
ETA: Fitz, go back and read my previous post. :P
Also, yes, I'd say the military would be appropriate on the Mexican border. We've done a better job securing the Afghanistan/Pakistan border than Border Patrol has ever done on the Mexican/American border.
I agree, but then you'd have people complaining about a military with a domestic mission.
"Border" security doesn't just happen within the borders. HSI and ICE frequently take down human smuggling operations that have tendrils deep into america.
Anyways, apparently one of the SAC's is in denver. Think FBI field office, but for HSI/ICE. Here's a map.
http://www.ice.gov/contact/inv/#denver
Interestingly enough, it seems to be the only one that is smack dab in the middle of the country. I wonder if the pathways through the mountains/whatever make it an artery for stuff coming in somehow.
Anyways. I'll ask around. See what kind of stuff they do in CO
-
I agree, but then you'd have people complaining about a military with a domestic mission.
"Border" security doesn't just happen within the borders. HSI and ICE frequently take down human smuggling operations that have tendrils deep into america.
...
Intercepting a foreign enemy incursion onto U.S. soil is not a domestic mission, and is entirely appropriate for the military, and stating that they can not patrol the border and prevent/intercept unauthorized crossings due to the peregrine nature of smuggling is specious.
-
Intercepting an external enemy incursion onto U.S. soil is not a domestic mission, and is entirely appropriate for the military, and stating that they can not patrol the border and prevent/intercept unauthorized crossings due to the peregrine nature of smuggling is specious.
I didn't precisely say that.
My point is that, when the US Army raided a house with indonesion human smugglers in it, people would be up in arms about military on US soil conducting operations.
So, you'd have to have the military doing the border part, and a civilian LE agency doing the internal stuff.
Of course, that would probably work fine, as interagency information sharing is fantastic.
-
...
So, you'd have to have the military doing the border part, and a civilian LE agency doing the internal stuff.
Of course, that would probably work fine, as interagency information sharing is fantastic.
You may be forgetting that intel was my specialty during my stint. It would not be overly hard to park a few BP/FBI types in the S2 shops of who-ever is commanding the troops on the border, and also embedding some BP ride-alongs with the troops on patrol to do the intel gathering when they catch a group.
By the by, I personally would confine the military to a 12 mile (from the border, north) operational corridor. Similar to territorial waters, but reversed and on land. The only time they could deviate from this corridor would be in active pursuit of folks illegally crossing.
-
You may be forgetting that intel was my specialty during my stint. It would not be overly hard to park a few BP/FBI types in the S2 shops of who-ever is commanding the troops on the border, and also embedding some BP ride-alongs with the troops on patrol to do the intel gathering when they catch a group.
By the by, I personally would confine the military to a 12 mile (from the border, north) operational corridor. Similar to territorial waters, but reversed and on land. The only time they could deviate from this corridor would be in active pursuit of folks illegally crossing.
Sure, it wouldn't be hard.
Assuming that US LE agencies, and the military, were anything other than a flusterlcuck at all levels.
In order for your (by the way, EXCELLENT) plan to work, it would require a complete dismantling and rebuilding of the organizational structure of CPB/ICE/DHS/ZOMGWTFBBQ
Which would be a good thing, sure.
None of what you have said is false. However, that's NOT the situation we have, and it's not the situation we'll get.
So, in the meantime, again... I see very little malice in HSI having armored vehicles.
EDIT: I'm sorry... I'm not articulating myself well.
Here's a summary
FACT: kgbsquirrel's plan would be awesome. Especially if coupled with a pullout from everywhere else.
- We don't have that, and won't anytime soon.
- There are some situations in which armored vehicles are applicable/useful in CPB/ICE/HSI missions
- They probably got these mraps for st00pid cheapz
- Hence any limitations or ill-suitedness of the platform is likely outweighed by the cost savings.
Another thought. If the evil DHS (and that's not sarcastic... While I think there's plenty of folks in sub agencies who do valuable work, it's a *expletive deleted*it organization as a whole) wanted to wage war on the citizenry, I don't think they'd do it with 50 MRAPs per state (assuming the number is accurate. I'm not convinced that it is.)
-
Let me start with I really don't think there's an evil plot to arm up our police forces to supress the citizenry and install tyranny. If there was we would know because there's no way the fed.gov could keep that a secret.
...
So now we know; it's not a secret :facepalm:
-
2700 of these things comes out to about 54 units per State.
Why does DHS need 50 tanks per State in the Union?
sounds like the perfect vehicle to run with the blackhawk live fire exercises! [tinfoil]
-
sounds like the perfect vehicle to run with the blackhawk live fire exercises! [tinfoil]
Yeah, no kidding. Billions of rounds of ammo, machine gun fire from helicopters in urban areas, drones for domestic use intended to spot people armed with rifles, and MRAPs.
Then fitz tells us:
Move along, move along! Nothing to see here.
I'm all warm and fuzzy in my Obamacare-provided fleece-lined straight jacket. ;)
-
I just think there's better uses of your outrage.
Still can't find a source on that 2700 number
-
Is this a new rumor of armored vehicles. Seems i remember an earlier story of a couple of thousand light vehicles similar to a BMP complete with spiffy DHS paint job and department seal. Seems this rumor had gun ports running down the side.
I think the rumor's author took an oldie and combined it with a picture of an MRAP. The only idiocy we haven't heard yet is the MRAP have manacles on the wall and a guillotine in the back.
Idiocy at is finest!
-
Well i see no "special antennas" on the MRAP's in the states.................................
So the same "tools" used in Iraq ,would work in the USA .
-
Several years ago, the BATF got their pee-pee smacked for assembling an air wing of 22 surplus USMC OV-10 Broncos.
The State Department owns them now, and they deploy out of Patrick AFB, spraying South American cocaine fields with Round Up.
-
Several years ago, the BATF got their pee-pee smacked for assembling an air wing of 22 surplus USMC OV-10 Broncos.
The State Department owns them now, and they deploy out of Patrick AFB, spraying South American cocaine fields with Round Up.
Monsanto is missing a big market for Roundup Ready products ...
-
Another thought. If the evil DHS (and that's not sarcastic... While I think there's plenty of folks in sub agencies who do valuable work, it's a *expletive deleted* organization as a whole) wanted to wage war on the citizenry, I don't think they'd do it with 50 MRAPs per state (assuming the number is accurate. I'm not convinced that it is.)
It might be some DHS idiot thinking, "I got a stoopid cheap deal on some major awesomze gear", to 'wage war on the citizenry' as you put it, not realizing the seriously limited utility of the things for that purpose. Stupid compounding stupid in this instance.
Most of the folks in DHS are probably stand-up decent types, but odds favor there being a handful clowns in the agency that think that way.
-
Back when I was a prosecutor, I did advisor work for the county SWAT team. Every year, they would get an invite to a nearby military faciliity where they drew a number,, and wen that number xame up, they went into a warehouse with a number of tags. Inside the warehouse was thousands of items that DOD had declared surplus, and law enforcement got first dibs on some items. It really was all I could do one year to stop the guys from tagging a UH-1 helocopter, much less two of the six that were up for grabs.
It's hard to say no to coll stuff,, especially if it's free.
-
Was it DEA or ATF that ended up with a bunch of OV-10 Bronco's sometime in the 90's? Seemed like light counter insurgency aircraft were a bit outside the mission parameters... unless they sent them south somewhere.
-
^^^ What Chris describes is how my county Sheriff department got their UH-1 helicopter.
-
Back when I was a prosecutor, I did advisor work for the county SWAT team. Every year, they would get an invite to a nearby military faciliity where they drew a number,, and wen that number xame up, they went into a warehouse with a number of tags. Inside the warehouse was thousands of items that DOD had declared surplus, and law enforcement got first dibs on some items. It really was all I could do one year to stop the guys from tagging a UH-1 helocopter, much less two of the six that were up for grabs.
It's hard to say no to coll stuff,, especially if it's free.
I wonder what restrictions there are on reselling the stuff once it's in their possession. If it was legal, an enterprising police department could basically become self-funding by reselling milsurp and any other "surplus" equipment they don't need anymore.
-
Tokugawa, those were the 22 each BATF OV-10 Broncos I posted about earlier in this thread.
They got them from the DoD, were busted, and subsequently gave them to the State Department, who still has them.
-
Several years ago, the BATF got their pee-pee smacked for assembling an air wing of 22 surplus USMC OV-10 Broncos.
The State Department owns them now, and they deploy out of Patrick AFB, spraying South American cocaine fields with Round Up.
It's no wonder that the rest of the world loves us so much :angel:
-
I wonder what restrictions there are on reselling the stuff once it's in their possession. If it was legal, an enterprising police department could basically become self-funding by reselling milsurp and any other "surplus" equipment they don't need anymore.
20 years ago, they picked up 10 M-16A1 rifles. Within months, they legally sold these to a Class 3 dealer and bought 20 law enforcement only M4geries with the funds, and had money left. They were 1970's manufacture, so the dealer gave them a pretty penny fr them, and sold them the LEO rifles at cost.
Couldn't do that these days with the guns, but other stuff, yes.
-
The MRAP is pretty good at defending folks from lightly armed, small ragtag groups of bad guys in an arid desert climate.
So, they're after my neighbors, eh?
-
I also don't even think this is a credible source. Again, i've heard NOTHING official about large MRAP purchases by DHS.
I agree, considering that gateway pundit is big on speculation and making stuff up, and short on facts. Their cited source is modernsurvivalblog. I don't know anything about them, but I am skeptical.
-
I agree, considering that gateway pundit is big on speculation and making stuff up, and short on facts. Their cited source is modernsurvivalblog. I don't know anything about them, but I am skeptical.
Again, i know we have them, but I have no credible info about numbers.
BTW, i asked the folks here what HSI was doing in CO. They said that there's a lot of smuggling/migrant traffic through there enroute to other places.
-
Again, i know we have them, but I have no credible info about numbers.
BTW, i asked the folks here what HSI was doing in CO. They said that there's a lot of smuggling/migrant traffic through there enroute to other places.
Thanks for asking.
Also for the board's perusing...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/294634_Factchecking-_Obama_DHS_Purcha
-
Approximately 16 ish.
http://www.businessinsider.com/homeland-security-serving-warrants-mrap-2013-3
So, sorta true but very very exaggerated.
-
The MRAPs were transferred to DHS from the Department of Defense, free of charge. But despite recent reports, they have actually been in service since at least 2008.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/homeland-security-serving-warrants-mrap-2013-3#ixzz2MrsxejRK
This explains why they got em. No one is gonna turn down a free tactical vehicle
And this explains their utility:
On May 3, 2012, three ICE agents were shot and injured while serving "high-risk" warrants during an early morning sweep of San Francisco Bay area gang members, according to a report from Yahoo! News.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/homeland-security-serving-warrants-mrap-2013-3#ixzz2Mrt6yHxg
-
Approximately 16 ish.
http://www.businessinsider.com/homeland-security-serving-warrants-mrap-2013-3
So, sorta true but very very exaggerated.
So - we've had a special militarized federal police for five years.
I feel so much better now.
-
So - we've had a special militarized federal police for five years.
I feel so much better now.
You've had it for a lot longer than 5 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
-
You've had it for a lot longer than 5 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
My thought precisely.
-
I wonder what restrictions there are on reselling the stuff once it's in their possession. If it was legal, an enterprising police department could basically become self-funding by reselling milsurp and any other "surplus" equipment they don't need anymore.
A lot of the DRMO stuff they have to hold on to and inventory each year because it's a loan, not a gift.
A lot of departments screwed up and have been cut off. Like selling the M-16s? It was legal as far as full auto rifles are concerned but the stickler is they sold .gov property when they weren't supposed too. If you were to do that nowadays, with say, shotguns or M-9s they'd get slapped pretty hard.