• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

DHS To Buy Real "Assault Weapons"?

Mike

Well-known member
Why? Who is DHS planning to attack?

The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.

Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.

The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

Republican New York state Sen. Greg Ball also issued a press release this week bringing attention to the weapons purchase request.

Calls made to DHS seeking information regarding whether or not the RFP was accepted and fulfilled were not immediately returned on Saturday.

Critics of such a ban on semi-automatic rifles are already arguing that the government is showing its hypocrisy by essentially saying they are good “personal defense” for them, but not for American citizens. When civilians own semi-automatic rifles, they somehow become “assault weapons.”

That being said, it is reasonable for the Department of Homeland Security to request these rifles as they are indeed effective personal defense weapons. The agency is tasked with keeping Americans safe from those who wish to do the country harm, and its officials should be equipped with all the tools they need to do so effectively.

But what about Americans who want to keep themselves and their families safe from threats? Is a semi-automatic rifle unacceptable for a civilian’s “personal defense” in his or her home? According to some Democratic lawmakers, like Sen. Feinstein, it appears the answer is yes.

Just last week two students in Rochester, N.Y. scared off a pair of home intruders by simply brandishing an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. One of the students said he believes the weapon saved their lives.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
Why? Who is DHS planning to attack?

The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.

Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.

The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

Republican New York state Sen. Greg Ball also issued a press release this week bringing attention to the weapons purchase request.

Calls made to DHS seeking information regarding whether or not the RFP was accepted and fulfilled were not immediately returned on Saturday.

Critics of such a ban on semi-automatic rifles are already arguing that the government is showing its hypocrisy by essentially saying they are good “personal defense” for them, but not for American citizens. When civilians own semi-automatic rifles, they somehow become “assault weapons.”

That being said, it is reasonable for the Department of Homeland Security to request these rifles as they are indeed effective personal defense weapons. The agency is tasked with keeping Americans safe from those who wish to do the country harm, and its officials should be equipped with all the tools they need to do so effectively.

But what about Americans who want to keep themselves and their families safe from threats? Is a semi-automatic rifle unacceptable for a civilian’s “personal defense” in his or her home? According to some Democratic lawmakers, like Sen. Feinstein, it appears the answer is yes.

Just last week two students in Rochester, N.Y. scared off a pair of home intruders by simply brandishing an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. One of the students said he believes the weapon saved their lives.


That wouldn't even arm 1/3 of the Border Patrol Agents, and not even counting in the Customs Service Agents , Federal Protective Service Officers, or other Federal Law Enforcement that fall under the Dept of Homeland Security...One of the Agencies I know that has been asking for more defense weapons is those that are tasked with guarding the nuclear reactors and nuclear facilities around the country...

So you don't think the Border Patrol patrolling the Mexican Border and Customs Agents battling the Drug Cartels deserve Personal Defense Weapons :???: How about those working to keep terrorists from attacking our Nuclear facilities :???: :roll:

What a Maroon.... :p :lol:

No wonder with the appearance of the current crop of rightwingernuts--more and more folks begin to agree with John Stuart Mill's 1866 comment:

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."
 

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Why? Who is DHS planning to attack?

The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.

Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.

The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

Republican New York state Sen. Greg Ball also issued a press release this week bringing attention to the weapons purchase request.

Calls made to DHS seeking information regarding whether or not the RFP was accepted and fulfilled were not immediately returned on Saturday.

Critics of such a ban on semi-automatic rifles are already arguing that the government is showing its hypocrisy by essentially saying they are good “personal defense” for them, but not for American citizens. When civilians own semi-automatic rifles, they somehow become “assault weapons.”

That being said, it is reasonable for the Department of Homeland Security to request these rifles as they are indeed effective personal defense weapons. The agency is tasked with keeping Americans safe from those who wish to do the country harm, and its officials should be equipped with all the tools they need to do so effectively.

But what about Americans who want to keep themselves and their families safe from threats? Is a semi-automatic rifle unacceptable for a civilian’s “personal defense” in his or her home? According to some Democratic lawmakers, like Sen. Feinstein, it appears the answer is yes.

Just last week two students in Rochester, N.Y. scared off a pair of home intruders by simply brandishing an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. One of the students said he believes the weapon saved their lives.


That wouldn't even arm 1/3 of the Border Patrol Agents, and not even counting in the Customs Service Agents , Federal Protective Service Officers, or other Federal Law Enforcement that fall under the Dept of Homeland Security...One of the Agencies I know that has been asking for more defense weapons is those that are tasked with guarding the nuclear reactors and nuclear facilities around the country...

So you don't think the Border Patrol patrolling the Mexican Border and Customs Agents battling the Drug Cartels deserve Personal Defense Weapons :???: How about those working to keep terrorists from attacking our Nuclear facilities :???: :roll:

What a Maroon.... :p :lol:

No wonder with the appearance of the current crop of rightwingernuts--more and more folks begin to agree with John Stuart Mill's 1866 comment:

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

And yet you say you are conservative. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Big Muddy rancher said:
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Why? Who is DHS planning to attack?


That wouldn't even arm 1/3 of the Border Patrol Agents, and not even counting in the Customs Service Agents , Federal Protective Service Officers, or other Federal Law Enforcement that fall under the Dept of Homeland Security...One of the Agencies I know that has been asking for more defense weapons is those that are tasked with guarding the nuclear reactors and nuclear facilities around the country...

So you don't think the Border Patrol patrolling the Mexican Border and Customs Agents battling the Drug Cartels deserve Personal Defense Weapons :???: How about those working to keep terrorists from attacking our Nuclear facilities :???: :roll:

What a Maroon.... :p :lol:

No wonder with the appearance of the current crop of rightwingernuts--more and more folks begin to agree with John Stuart Mill's 1866 comment:

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

And yet you say you are conservative. :roll:

Even that I am-- it still doesn't change the perception folks are getting of "conservatives" when these rightwingernuts go around making stupid statements or asking stupid questions like WHY Homeland Security would needs personal defense weapons when they are comprised of the following agencies:

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Transportation Security Administration
United States Coast Guard
National Protection and Programs Directorate
United States Secret Service
plus security duties for others like the Dept of Energy...
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Big Muddy rancher said:
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Why? Who is DHS planning to attack?


That wouldn't even arm 1/3 of the Border Patrol Agents, and not even counting in the Customs Service Agents , Federal Protective Service Officers, or other Federal Law Enforcement that fall under the Dept of Homeland Security...One of the Agencies I know that has been asking for more defense weapons is those that are tasked with guarding the nuclear reactors and nuclear facilities around the country...

So you don't think the Border Patrol patrolling the Mexican Border and Customs Agents battling the Drug Cartels deserve Personal Defense Weapons :???: How about those working to keep terrorists from attacking our Nuclear facilities :???: :roll:

What a Maroon.... :p :lol:

No wonder with the appearance of the current crop of rightwingernuts--more and more folks begin to agree with John Stuart Mill's 1866 comment:

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

And yet you say you are conservative. :roll:

He's definitely a Maroon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
Oldtimer said:
That wouldn't even arm 1/3 of the Border Patrol Agents, and not even counting in the Customs Service Agents , Federal Protective Service Officers, or other Federal Law Enforcement that fall under the Dept of Homeland Security...One of the Agencies I know that has been asking for more defense weapons is those that are tasked with guarding the nuclear reactors and nuclear facilities around the country...

So you don't think the Border Patrol patrolling the Mexican Border and Customs Agents battling the Drug Cartels deserve Personal Defense Weapons :???: How about those working to keep terrorists from attacking our Nuclear facilities :???: :roll:

What a Maroon.... :p :lol:

No wonder with the appearance of the current crop of rightwingernuts--more and more folks begin to agree with John Stuart Mill's 1866 comment:

And yet you say you are conservative. :roll:

He's definitely a Maroon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So FH- are you saying those agencies and departments should not have weapons?

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Transportation Security Administration
United States Coast Guard
National Protection and Programs Directorate
United States Secret Service
plus security duties for others like the Dept of Energy...


Or are you acting normal and just kissing rear to the Mikes of the board :???: :roll: :p :lol:
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
I'm laughing at your spelling of MORON............. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
you spelled it MAROON and I thought it was funny.

Nothing more.......nothing less......
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Faster horses said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
And yet you say you are conservative. :roll:

He's definitely a Maroon. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So FH- are you saying those agencies and departments should not have weapons?
Or are you just kissing rear to the Mikes of the board :???:

Ok let's just for a minute let's just she was, at least it is a hundred times better than what you are kissing of obamas.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
So if the weapon is in the hands of private citizen, it is called an "assualt weapon" and if in the hands of a DHS agent, a "personal defense weapon"

:lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
I'm laughing at your spelling of MORON............. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
you spelled it MAROON and I thought it was funny.

Nothing more.......nothing less......

NO I spelled Maroon- apparently you never watched Bugs Bunny..

Maroon:

Term made famous by Bugs Bunny meaning a pushover, or one easily fooled.

A dope, fool, idiot, or nincompoop.

Unbelievably stupid person.

Might have been derived from moron: adding an extra letter "o" to moron meaning double-moron, thus a maroon.

Usually preceded by the words "what a"...

He thought he was eating chocolate ice cream but it was
vanilla with chocolate syrup--what a maroon!

He thought that wax fruit was real--what a maroon!

He fell in love with a stripper again--what a maroon!
 

Steve

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
So if the weapon is in the hands of private citizen, it is called an "assualt weapon" and if in the hands of a DHS agent, a "personal defense weapon"

:lol:

somehow that just flew right over OT's head...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
So if the weapon is in the hands of private citizen, it is called an "assault weapon" and if in the hands of a DHS agent, a "personal defense weapon"

:lol:

Call them what you want-- military weapons, full auto capables, assault weapons, PDW, whatever..

The stupidity of the post was Mikes questioning WHY the superpower Dept that GW made would need such weapons-- and to any sane, sober person using common sense it is quite apparent....

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Transportation Security Administration
United States Coast Guard
National Protection and Programs Directorate
United States Secret Service
plus security duties for others like the Dept of Energy...

Unless your a Liberal anti gun proponent! :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Steve said:
hypocritexposer said:
So if the weapon is in the hands of private citizen, it is called an "assualt weapon" and if in the hands of a DHS agent, a "personal defense weapon"

:lol:

somehow that just flew right over OT's head...

maybe he should have read the article, before he flew into his rant. :lol:


Mike appears to have set him up...and it worked as planned. :lol: :lol: :p 8)
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
Why? Who is DHS planning to attack?

The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.

Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.

The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

Republican New York state Sen. Greg Ball also issued a press release this week bringing attention to the weapons purchase request.

Calls made to DHS seeking information regarding whether or not the RFP was accepted and fulfilled were not immediately returned on Saturday.

Critics of such a ban on semi-automatic rifles are already arguing that the government is showing its hypocrisy by essentially saying they are good “personal defense” for them, but not for American citizens. When civilians own semi-automatic rifles, they somehow become “assault weapons.”

That being said, it is reasonable for the Department of Homeland Security to request these rifles as they are indeed effective personal defense weapons. The agency is tasked with keeping Americans safe from those who wish to do the country harm, and its officials should be equipped with all the tools they need to do so effectively.

But what about Americans who want to keep themselves and their families safe from threats? Is a semi-automatic rifle unacceptable for a civilian’s “personal defense” in his or her home? According to some Democratic lawmakers, like Sen. Feinstein, it appears the answer is yes.

Just last week two students in Rochester, N.Y. scared off a pair of home intruders by simply brandishing an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. One of the students said he believes the weapon saved their lives.


That wouldn't even arm 1/3 of the Border Patrol Agents, and not even counting in the Customs Service Agents , Federal Protective Service Officers, or other Federal Law Enforcement that fall under the Dept of Homeland Security...One of the Agencies I know that has been asking for more defense weapons is those that are tasked with guarding the nuclear reactors and nuclear facilities around the country...

So you don't think the Border Patrol patrolling the Mexican Border and Customs Agents battling the Drug Cartels deserve Personal Defense Weapons :???: How about those working to keep terrorists from attacking our Nuclear facilities :???: :roll:

What a Maroon.... :p :lol:

No wonder with the appearance of the current crop of rightwingernuts--more and more folks begin to agree with John Stuart Mill's 1866 comment:

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

You just made his point and you don't even realize it. If drug cartels are so big and bad and they are attacking agents in the US, why doesn't the average citizen have the same right to protect themselves from the cartels? How many people have been kidnapped in El Paso and drug over the Juarez? You won't have a clue, but if you lived there you'd know.

The law enforcement is not the army. So, were not talking military weapons here.

If a threat is so imminent to law enforcement individuals stationed in the US, the same threat will exist for all other civilians, having the same capability. [/b]
 

Mike

Well-known member
Hey Einstein, these Depts:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
United States Coast Guard
United States Secret Service
Transportation Security

buy weapons under their own moniker and each have their own acquisition and/or procurement office. :lol: :lol:

For instance:
U.S. Secret Service
Procurement Division
245 Murray Drive,
Building 410,
Washington, DC 20223
202-406-6940

Maybe DHS needs assault weapons for their "Cyber Security" branch? :lol:


As Hypo put it so eloquently:
So if the weapon is in the hands of private citizen, it is called an "assault weapon" and if in the hands of a DHS agent, a "personal defense weapon"?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

P.S. I think I had rather be a Maroon than a Stooge. :lol: :lol:
 
Top