Congressman: “It’s My Duty” To Get To The Bottom Of Massive DHS Ammo Buys
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Congressman: “It’s My Duty” To Get To The Bottom Of Massive DHS Ammo Buys

on

  • 335 views

“Our law enforcement can’t seem to buy their own ammunition”

“Our law enforcement can’t seem to buy their own ammunition”

Statistics

Views

Total Views
335
Views on SlideShare
335
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Congressman: “It’s My Duty” To Get To The Bottom Of Massive DHS Ammo Buys Congressman: “It’s My Duty” To Get To The Bottom Of Massive DHS Ammo Buys Document Transcript

  • Congressman: “It’s My Duty” To Get To TheBottom Of Massive DHS Ammo BuysSteve WatsonInfowars.comMarch 26, 2013“Our law enforcement can’t seem to buy their own ammunition”The Californian Congressman heading up a group of Representatives who have demanded anexplanation for massive ammunition purchases by the government explained yesterday that he feelsduty bound to investigate the matter in a time when many Americans do not trust their government.Rep. Doug LaMalfa (CA), stated in a Fox News interview that he and fourteen other Congressmanwrote to the Department of Homeland Security for answers because Americans deserve an explanationfor what is a highly unusual situation.“There is a big mistrust by many many people of their government these days and so when they ask meto check in on this, I think it is my duty as an elected official, as a representative, to get to the bottom.”LaMalfa told host Megyn Kelly.“These are just questions that we think are appropriate, need to be asked, and they come from thepeople across the country.” he added.LaMalfa explained that the DHS’s explanation so far in its purchase of close to 2 billion hollow pointbullets has not been acceptable, describing it as “a heck of a lot of rounds of ammunition and for somevery dubious-sounding reasons.”
  • “…people are wondering why, for example, is the Social Security Administration getting almost200,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition.” LaMalfa said. “What is it about our social securitychecks and administration that we have guys toting hollow point around with them?” “If it’s for target practice, there is an awful lot of hollow point going out to these various agencies, thatare not appropriate for target practice because they are much more costly rounds.” The Congressmannoted.“So it’s one thing to have the right people go out and do the practice that they need to do, but I thinkthis is certainly worthy of a series of questions because a lot of people want to know.” he added.“In this time of sequester where everything is a disaster, do they really have that kind of money to bespending on this amount of ammunition? Especially at a time when they are releasing many hardenedcriminals across the country.” LaMalfa also noted, referring to the recently uncovered strategy torelease hundreds of prisoners in order to meet budget cuts.The Congressman also pointed to the fact that the ammo buys are contributing to nationwide shortages.“… all told it’s about 2 billion rounds out there and yes, local law enforcement is having a hard time.They are having to buy from people they know that might have a stash, or other means that really isn’tvery professional.” The Congressman said.“It seems unusual and I think it is sending a wrong message to the people of this nation when they can’tbuy their own ammunition. Our law enforcement can’t seem to buy their own ammunition.” he urged.When asked if he believed the “conspiracy theories” that the government was preparing for civil unrestor intentionally attempting to restrict ammunition supplies, LaMalfa said “Well, that might be reachinga little far,” but added the caveat “There are people making fun of it a little bit, and you are using thesewords ‘paranoia’, but I think these questions are very appropriate.”LaMalfa also said that the DHS has acknowledged his letter, and that he is now waiting for the agencyto process an official response. As we reported last week, other members of Congress who have askedsimilar questions to those posed by LaMalfa have been rebuffed.Watch the interview:Department Of Homeland Security Set To Purchase 1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammunition VIDEOBELOWhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvc__urKl88&feature=player_embedded
  • Weapons Manufacturer: Big Sis Attemptingto Exhaust Ammo SuppliesPaul Joseph WatsonInfowars.comMarch 26, 2013Bullet buys aimed at drying up market in end run around second amendmentA weapons manufacturer who supplies the federal government with ammunition told the nationallysyndicated Savage Nation radio show that the Department of Homeland Security’s huge ammopurchases were an attempt to dry up supplies as part of an end run around the second amendment.Michael Savage Talks to Expert about DHS buying Massive Amount of Ammunition2 14 13VIDEO BELOWhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SxLMviYH95oThe caller, who described himself as a defense contractor and a licensed weapons manufacturer, saidthe goal was to “control the amount of market that’s available on the commercial market at any time,”by forcing manufacturers to hold back stock.“If they periodically do this in increments, they’re going to control how much ammo is available on thecommercial market,” said the caller, adding that the contracts with bullet manufacturers stipulate thateverything made goes to the government as the number one priority before it is allowed to enter thecommercial market.The caller noted how this process had caused prices to shoot up at gun shows, while in the commercialmarket ammunition was very limited and on back order as a result and that “supply cannot keep upwith demand.” He also noted how the State Department and the ATF were making it harder to importammunition from overseas.
  • Host Michael Savage stated that the DHS’ commitment to purchase 1.6 billion bullets over the pastyear was, “obviously an attempt to dry up the ammunition market, to control the ammunition market.”The weapons manufacturer agreed, adding that the deals the DHS is agreeing with manufacturers arebased on, “indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity,” allowing the feds to monopolize the supply onammo by preventing companies from selling the bullets to the commercial market.Savage tied the bullet demand to the huge number of new gun purchases since Obama took office,noting, “people are afraid of him….he is the most frightening American President in modern Americanhistory….so people are rushing out to buy guns to protect themselves….but what does a gun need? Agun needs a bullet,” adding that the government is trying to enact gun control via the back door becausethe second amendment says nothing about the right to buy ammunition.The DHS’ huge bullet buys, although erroneously dismissed by some as routine, have exacerbatedthe nationwide shortage of ammunition, with police departments now so desperate for ammo they arebeing forced to barter with each other to meet their needs.In a letter sent to the Department of Homeland Security, Californian Congressman Doug LaMalfa and14 of his House colleagues asked if the bulk bullet purchases were, “being conducted in a manner thatstrategically denies the American people access to ammunition.”The DHS subsequently denied that charge, claiming the bullets were being bought in bulk to savemoney and were for training purposes only.However, as we have documented, most of the bullets being purchased are hollow point rounds, whichare almost twice as expensive as regular firing range bullets and therefore unsuitable for trainingpurposes.As former Marine Richard Mason told reporters with WHPTV News in Pennsylvania earlier thismonth, “We never trained with hollow points, we didn’t even see hollow points my entire four and ahalf years in the Marine Corps.”
  • Yes, Hitler Really Did Take the Guns BeforeThrowing Jews into Concentration Camps (orGas Chambers)J. D. HeyesNatural NewsMarch 26, 2013They say those who learn nothing from history are doomed to repeat it, but then again, sometimesrepeating history is exactly the point, as longtime anti-gun Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s new “assaultweapons ban” planned legislation for early next year proves. Feinstein, a California Democrat, wasinstrumental in enacting a similar piece of legislation in 1994; with the help of President Clinton andDemocratic majorities in both Houses of Congress, that ban lasted a decade before being allowed toexpire by a Republican-controlled Congress in 2004.But her current measure would go much further and, in many ways, actually mirrors anti-gun measuresenacted nearly 75 years ago by Nazi leader Adolph Hitler, in a bid to disarm a particular ethnic grouphe loathed.This is gun control reduxPrior to 1938, when Hitler’s new restrictions were put in place, the earlier Weimar Republicgovernment had already enacted gun registration. “The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intendedto disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use themagainst their enemies once they were in power,” says Clayton Cramer, author of the book Firing Back,as told to the website The Straight Dope. So what Hitler essentially did was strengthen existing Germanlaw (which was aimed primarily at preventing Jews from being armed).And that is the all-important difference. Bernard E. Harcourt, writing for the University of ChicagoLaw School and Political Science Department, notes:If you read the 1938 Nazi gun laws closely and compare them to earlier 1928 Weimar gun legislation –
  • as a straightforward exercise ofstatutory interpretation – severalconclusions become clear. First, withregard to possession and carrying offirearms, the Nazi regime relaxed thegun laws that were in place in Germanyat the time the Nazis seized power.Second, the Nazi gun laws of 1938specifically banned Jewish personsfrom obtaining a license to manufacturefirearms or ammunition. Third,approximately eight months afterenacting the 1938 Nazi gun laws,Hitler imposed regulations prohibitingJewish persons from possessing anydangerous weapons, includingfirearms.The point was, Hitler had it in for theJews, so he first disarmed thembefore carrying out his murderouscampaign against them. And, unableto resist, millions died.“In Germany, firearm registration helped lead to the holocaust,” National Rifle Association executivevice president Wayne LaPierre wrote in his book, “Gun, Crimes and Freedom.”Nothing new under the sun Here are some key aspects of the 1938 law: – Police permission was required to own a handgun; – All firearms had to be registered; – Any Germans who enjoyed shooting bolt- action rifles were told to join the army “if they wished to shoot ‘military’ rifles,” writes LaPierre, in his book; – The Nazi regime “also enacted the “Regulations against Jews’ possession of weapons” within the days of Kristallnacht – the ‘night of broken glass’ – when stormtroopers attacked synagogues and Jews throughout Germany,” he wrote; – Firearms registration lists were used to identify (and persecute) gun owners (bear in mind that a New York newspaper just published the names and addresses of legal handgun permit holders after obtaining them via a
  • Freedom of Information Act request,because permit holders by the verynature of obtaining the permit had to beregistered[http://www.naturalnews.com/038479_gun_owners_New_York_newspaper.html]).Let’s compare these Nazi-era guncontrol requirements to what Feinstein isproposing. As posted on her Senatewebsite, her legislation would:– Ban the sale, transfer, importation ormanufacture of 120 specifically-namedfirearms;– “Certain other semiautomatic rifles,handguns, shotguns that can accept adetachable magazine and have one ormore military characteristics;”– “Semiautomatic rifles and handgunswith a fixed magazine that can acceptmore than 10 rounds;”– Require that currently owned weaponsthat would be grandfathered innevertheless be registered under the National Firearms Act;– Require a background check of any owner and/or transferee;– Provide the government with the type and serial number of the weapon;– Require a photograph and fingerprint to be on file with the government;– “Dedicated funding for [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] to implementregistration” of firearms (keep in mind the BATF is the federal agency responsible for launching“Operation Fast and Furious,” in which federal agents supplied thousands of weapons Feinstein wantsto ban to Mexican drug gangs, several of which have since been tied to the murders of Mexicancitizens and U.S. federal agents [http://www.naturalnews.com]).What we’ve seen before, we may see againIt doesn’t take a genius (or conspiracy theorist) to figure out the parallels between Nazi gun controllaws and some of the same provisions being pushed by Feinstein. Understanding that our country is nota totalitarian state (yet), Feinstein and other gun-controllers like President Obama, New York MayorMichael Bloomberg and others all know they have to take a longer, more measured approach todisarming the U.S. public, that they can’t just mandate it overnight.But make no mistake, new gun control laws like those being proposed are nothing more than rehashedmandates dredged up from the past, with similar intentions: To make political opponents and themasses less powerful and less able to resist. http://www.infowars.com/