[BobFromBucks]

Here is his response to my letter asking him about the huge building up of ammo and the MRAP purchases by DHS. SSA and NOAA claim to carry and practice with hollow points. I guess they have their own security/law enforcement. If a weather scientist is carrying hollow points and IRS agent must carry full auto. DHS claims the ammunition purchase is only "potential" and most likely will never be used. You can read the response below.

He apparently is naive or he thinks this answer will satisfy his constituents. I intend to follow-up with more questions. Like what does a Rapid Response Team respond too that they need mine resistant vehicles in the USA?

I welcome any specific questions Forum members would like me to address. The next letter will be sent certified by snail mail.

Dear Bob:

Thank you for contacting me about ammunition and armor plated vehicle purchases by federal agencies. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you know, it has recently been reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Social Security Administration (SSA) seek to purchase large quantities of hollow point bullets. In addition, it was also reported that DHS purchased 2,700 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles.

First and foremost, I understand your concern that federal law enforcement agencies should only be acquiring the types and quantities of ammunition and vehicles that are necessary to protect the American people. As such, I reached out to the above federal agencies to inquire about the nature of these alleged purchases. The NOAA and SSA responded by saying they have law enforcement officers who carry weapons and use standard issued hollow point bullets, mainly for target practice.

DHS, which oversees multiple law enforcement agencies, awarded a large five-year department-wide contract to an ammunition company in order to reduce costs. According to DHS, no ammunition was purchased with the award of this contract and the department might not ever use the fully allotted amount. Over the next five years, DHS and component agencies may use the contract to place orders of ammunition with the vendor. The contract sets the maximum number of rounds DHS can purchase. DHS routinely purchases these large quantities of ammunition because buying in bulk brings down the overall cost of the order. The vast majority of ammunition used is for mandated firearms training.

According to DHS, the potential purchase of this ammunition is not contributing to the nationwide shortage of ammunition. Due to proposals by President Obama and members of Congress concerning stricter gun control, citizens across the country have purchased unusually high quantities of ammunition.

With regard to the purchase of armor plated vehicles, these reports stem from a March 15, 2012 announcement that DHS had engaged a contractor to install a new chassis on a number of MRAP vehicles that were being returned from deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan. DHS did not purchase the MRAP vehicles and only has 16 in its inventory. Instead, some of the vehicles will be repurposed for DHS Rapid Response teams. An example of use by these teams would be to move within areas that have experienced natural disasters.
I thank you for bringing this issue to my attention. As a strong supporter of the rights of Americans and their freedoms under the Constitution, I will continue to monitor this issue with your concerns in mind.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,

Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania

[billamj]

Write him back and ask why DHS feels it is necessary to use the more expensive hollow point ammunition for target practice than the less expensive, and made for target practice, fmj bullets that most of us use. I would certainly like to know how the explain that one.

[Connal]

Write him back and ask why DHS feels it is necessary to use the more expensive hollow point ammunition for target practice than the less expensive, and made for target practice, fmj bullets that most of us use. I would certainly like to know how the explain that one.

An excellent point. After all, it would help to reduce spending by a great deal.

[kadar]

DHS, which oversees multiple law enforcement agencies, awarded a large five-year department-wide contract to an ammunition company in order to reduce costs. According to DHS, no ammunition was purchased with the award of this contract and the department might not ever use the fully allotted amount. Over the next five years, DHS and component agencies may use the contract to place orders of ammunition with the vendor. The contract sets the maximum number of rounds DHS can purchase. DHS routinely purchases these large quantities of ammunition because buying in bulk brings down the overall cost of the order. The vast majority of ammunition used is for mandated firearms training.

According to DHS, the potential purchase of this ammunition is not contributing to the nationwide shortage of ammunition. Due to proposals by President Obama and members of Congress concerning stricter gun control, citizens across the country have purchased unusually high quantities of ammunition.

What he fails to understand is that even without a purchase the manufacturer has to have that ammo on hand to fulfill the order. That is ammo that sits in a warehouse that may not even be purchased. Since their orders take priority over citizen orders it does create a shortage on our side.
All he needs to do to verify this is to simply ask the retailers if they are receiving the same amount of ammo as the previous year. Not what they order and receive, but if they are receiving same amounts as they have in the previous years.
(ie. Ammo orders are up 30% but only receiving 20% of a normal 2011 order)

[BobFromBucks]

[quote='kadar' pid='92044' dateline='1364500358']

All he needs to do to verify this is to simply ask the retailers if they are receiving the same amount of ammo as the previous year. Not what they order and receive, but if they are receiving same amounts as they have in the previous years.
(ie. Ammo orders are up 30% but only receiving 20% of a normal 2011 order)

Do you have a citation or that statistic or is it personal experience? I'd like to use it with him. Thanks.

[kadar]

[quote='kadar' pid='92044' dateline='1364500358']

All he needs to do to verify this is to simply ask the retailers if they are receiving the same amount of ammo as the previous year. Not what they order and receive, but if they are receiving same amounts as they have in the previous years.
(ie. Ammo orders are up 30% but only receiving 20% of a normal 2011 order)

Do you have a citation or that statistic or is it personal experience? I'd like to use it with him. Thanks.

No. That was just from what others have said about places such as Walmart.
That was why I suggested that he do the work. (if he really cared he would)