Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Where is all the Military gear coming from??

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 02:31 AM
link   
In the introduction to this forum when it was created, it's creator laid down this as it's second reason for being....

2) The militarization of police in the United States and around the world

So, while this material isn't precisely hot off the presses? The impacts and arrival of gear on our streets and in our public squares is accelerating and becoming more noticeable. Some folks in media and around the nation have suggested this isn't so, but it is and for logical reasons. The're short sighted and ill considered reasons for consequence, but they are logical reasons.

The U.S. Department of Defense has been running a fairly constant 600-700 billion a year for years. It's always taken a breath taking amount. What does all that do? 'It goes to contractors!'..is the common charge, and it's correct to a fair degree. It is going to buying new stuff while improving current stuff. Stuff Stuff and MORE stuff.

I checked earlier...and 700 Billion, if the Department of Defense were it's own nation, would place it as #20 for wealthiest, right behind Saudi Arabia. Imagine just how MUCH stuff that makes in a system where "Use it or lose it" is the motto by which annual department spending runs.

Enter...The Congressional Research Service's Report and what I came to share.


Property considered surplus can be reused, transferred, donated, or sold; potential recipients may include law enforcement agencies, school systems, medical institutions, civic and community organizations, libraries, homeless assistance providers, state and local government agencies, and the public. During FY2008, about 56,000 military organizations and components turned in over 3.5 million items to DLA Disposition Services.4 About half of all surplus items are designated for the foreign military sales program, and about half are made available to other government agencies, eligible donees, or sold to the public.5


A bit more digging and I found where a lot of this military stuff is coming from....


Major Recipients


State and Local Governments

If property cannot be reused or transferred to other federal agencies, it may be donated to state and local government programs. Each state has designated a “State Agency for Surplus Property Program,” a local governing authority to receive and distribute all federal surplus property. The program authorizes “screeners” to handle the logistics, and the state agency may charge a fee for handling the transaction. Eligible recipients include, but are not limited to, organizations that promote public health, safety, education, recreation, conservation, and other public needs, including veterans groups and Native American organizations. Groups that qualify as a “service education activity” may have a slight priority in the screening process.


Law Enforcement Support Office (LESO)

LESO administers 10 U.S.C. Section 2576a, which transfers excess DOD equipment to federal and state law enforcement agencies through the 1033 Program.15 DLA estimates that since 1990, more than $4.2 billion worth of property has been transferred; in FY2011 alone, a record $502 million worth of property was transferred.
Source: Defense Surplus Equipment Disposal: Background Information - Sept / 2013 (emphasis mine)

Oh, and that logical reason that I've read various versions of? It would cost them more to keep and maintain whatever the equipment is, than to give it away to local agencies. That's all well and good I suppose...as far as it goes. I wonder, just maybe, if demilitarizing and then scrapping for recycling might work a bit better?

Imagine, for a moment, what the United States would have looked like in the Beaver Cleaver days, had the U.S Government had this same approach following World War II? Little Beaver would have been dodging tear gas canisters while no one would have needed the old west movies for gun fire. I think dumping the tools of war into a society, even if nothing negative was meant, can only bring a changing face to the overall society which is just as bad.

...and that's still A LOT of stuff. How much stuff can one army need, anyway? Whew...
edit on 20-4-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 02:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Very timely thread, Wrabbit. They are apparently being distributed to a lot of rural areas. My tiny mountain community even got one this year. It looks like a steel clad army swat tank. I haven't a clue why one would even be needed here.

There was another thread recently, asking why these military units, are being placed in so many rural, sparsely populated areas.

Plus, the gear that comes with this type of military vehicle is coming with it. Training is part of the package too.

It's all very strange to me...I feel like they are placing foxes in the rural hen houses. But, that just may be my paranoia speaking.



Des



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 03:08 AM
link   
"Stuff" is a lot of it. Not not all of it.
In 2010 contracted product spending was $166 billion out of a total of $664 billion, 26%. That number peaked in 2008.

Contracted services was running about the same as products. Contracted R&D was $41 billion.

csis.org...



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 05:16 AM
link   
Regardless of the agreed amounts of spending on military gear, either it's still an obscene amount of money. Forget prepping for the next great disaster (natural or otherwise) around the globe, forget the billions in constant poverty, forget decent health care to those who need it, it seems we need more and more weapons.

To the uneducated, why don't we all just have a big war right now?



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
One thing I have noticed since 2001 from the prior decade has been a mania for 'new stuff' in military (well at least the US Army).

Before that you maintained and fixed stuff long past parts even being available to fix things. Now stuff is not even worn out before you get the next generation of stuff. Heck, you may not even be 100% up to speed on using something before the update comes out and you need to start over.

It really seems akin to consumerism. Why fix and maintain when you can just get something better? When was the last time you saw a TV repairman?

My guess is the secondary consumer market can be lucrative too. Item X was already paid for, contracted for brief maintenance, and contracted for usage instruction. Well the manufacturer can replay the latter two all over again. Instead of federal tax dollars now they get state or local tax dollars.

Unfortunately now-a-days, the government dollar is the hottest game in town.



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Miltary surpluss being transfered to police and other groups started after WW2. At the time farms got uniforsm and took the engines out of trucks. Police got vehicles and some small arms. etc. Real weapons then as now are generaly sold to foriegn buyers. Of course the stuff given away has to be demilitraized as in no weapons so they are things anybody could own.



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ABNARTY

You can say that second part about not fixing things again. We've made everything disposable. Even Main Battle Tanks. Just another widget to throw out when it breaks... (sigh)


HERLONG, California (CNN) - If you need an example of why it is hard to cut the budget in Washington look no further than this Army depot in the shadow of the Sierra Nevada range.

CNN was allowed rare access to what amounts to a parking lot for more than 2,000 M-1 Abrams tanks. Here, about an hour's drive north of Reno, Nevada, the tanks have been collecting dust in the hot California desert because of a tiff between the Army and Congress.
Source

As someone else pointed out, they have been surplusing equipment since '45 (or before). Although it doesn't take much for eyes to see surplusing jeeps and surplusing an MRAP are quite different things. (Particularly when some MRAP's still have the New Car Smell vs. Surplus as we'd think of that)

It is remarkable how folks can see the same world and miss the changes that are so evident to a majority. It does take all kinds to make our world turn tho.



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I think what irritates me the most about people complaining about the gear that police officers are receiving or already have, is the fact that it can all be owned by any citizen (that legally can). Well except for maybe flashbangs. However, as a patrol officer I cannot have flashbangs either.

Anyone can purchase an AR15, suppressors, pre ban fully auto weapons or short barreled rifles (with tax stamp which I think is unconstitutional), night vision, IR lasers, certain forms of CS gas, smoke, body armor and armored vehicles.

As for training. Any citizen can take a "tactical" training course from numerous instructors; Magpul Dynamics, Tactical Response, EAG Tactical etc. Those classes are light years beyond how the standard patrol officer is trained.

The only argument I can see is financial. Like upkeep costs and the like. I get that.

But maybe it is because I am a police officer. I just feel that if any citizen can have access to it, we should as well. Just like I feel anything that the police have access to, citizens should too.

Flame on.
edit on 20-4-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

Yeah, how dare the police who respond to barricaded hostage situations where people shoot at us and others, not have an armored vehicle to protect us and the people we evacuate.

Not that my department has an armored vehicle. However, if they ever entertain the idea, I will make sure to tell them that we will just ride up on our bicycles instead.

Wouldn't want to offend anyone.

Why don't you put on a badge and gun, and come with me to the next barricaded hostage situation......Yeah that is what I thought.

PS When the police add 105MM and/or 120MM weaponry to their "tanks" I will agree something will need to be done.

edit on 20-4-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-4-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-4-2014 by TorqueyThePig because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: Destinyone

Yeah, how dare the police who respond to barricaded hostage situations where people shoot at us and others, not have an armored vehicle to protect us and the people we evacuate.

Not that my department has an armored vehicle. However, if they ever entertain the idea, I will make sure to tell them that we will just ride up on our bicycles instead.

Wouldn't want to offend anyone.

Why don't you put on a badge and gun, and come with me to the next barricaded hostage situation......Yeah that is what I thought.


In my neck of the woods, we don't have barricaded hostage situations. I'm sorry you live in an environment where that is the norm. My itty bitty LE department up here in the mountains was given an armored swatt vehicle. Maybe your department heads should request one. I hear they can't give them out fast enough...

Good luck on getting a big piece of military equipment to make you feel better...


Des

edit on 20-4-2014 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

You know I don't flame, especially cops. Just not my way. I do disagree with you on one point, while perhaps agreeing on the other.

In context to my thoughts, I'll note the North Hollywood bank robbery as the example. You say access, and I can't argue when we see what the extremes of citizen creativity can produce. Those guys took straight gunfire over a sustained period, in direct hit after direct hit like a video game. If I'm not mistaken, it took head shots on both to finally end it. I recall at the time, part of the biggest problem was the shotguns and handguns were toys at the range they were returning high caliber AK fire, punching through doors and light protection. Even looting local gun stores for more firepower didn't end the firefight (I have wondered why no one could have made the shot with stores full of scoped hunting rifles to grab...but I digress)

So..it wouldn't be intellectually honest of me to say cops shouldn't have access to military grade weapons. In cases like that or in, say, swift water rescue as another example, even MRAP's have practical uses and roles only a vehicle of that nature can play. ACCESS....is what I agree with. Carry in daily patrol, or automatic weapons clipped to the underside of the trunk lid, or MP-5's in watch commander vehicles is just stupid.

I recall my Father describing what he'd personally seen and had access to, in emergency only, within the armory of a Southern California department in the 80's. Obviously..no one called that Dept for North Hollywood, as it would have ended differently (maybe with a crater or two...lol) but again, that was heavy equipment they had access to...after a declaration of special need...and distribution from the Department on the one-off event. THAT I understand.

What I don't and can't get behind is the open, daily and obnoxious flaunting of force SO far beyond what the average citizen or even criminal has (not can have..but DOES have) that it's more like a real nasty Sci-Fi movie at times than America as I knew her to grow up in. Next we'll have major cities making the case for arming Police air assets.

Err... Wait...nvm.
(Blue Thunder was a fantasy and a cool thing to see in person as a set piece...no one really thought we SEE that flying in different forms, back then)
edit on 20-4-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 07:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

I am sorry that I feel armored personal carriers can assist police officers and citizens in certain situations. I don't live in a world of rainbows and butterflies.

I understand that you live in a small town and you feel that your department doesn't need it. That is your opinion. It is neither right nor wrong.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Are MRAPS being used for standard patrol duties by departments? Are there departments where patrol officers are regulary carrying fully auto weapons?

If that is occuring I am not aware.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Would you say a high power rifle need be full automatic before you see a problem with it? I don't have many issues with my local department but I do have ONE big one. They did a raid in my neighborhood a few years back and I was horrified to see them carrying AR- platforms. .223 in a woodframe residential area?

I know cops don't see the problem...but yeah, even I'm sick and tired of seeing a police force that is FAR closer to a combat soldier for gear and capability than the beat cop able to protect when needed and serve when called upon. Today, serving is with a warrant and protecting is liability for force used.

Something is WAY out of whack, and the fact you'd need to ask that, to seek those technical clarifications for saying it's a problem, IS the problem. Access to high power gear IN ONE TIME EMERGENCY is one thing.

Since you asked tho.... California Highway Patrol units I say had both a Mini-14 and shotgun, while New Mexico state units I saw had an AR- and shotgun. Do I need to know they are spray and pray capable? No...I don't need that to say there is a problem here. I want a cop...not a soldier.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I have an AR 15 in my patrol vehicle. It is semi automatic. The same type of rifle owned by millions throughout America.

Are you saying you have a problem with patrol officers having access to semi automatic AR 15's?

I find it funny that when gun grabbers refer to an AR 15 as an "assault weapon" people are quick to correct them (rightfully so). Yet they then in turn say that they don't want police officers having miltary style weaponry. Pot meet keetle.

Again I have access to a semi automatic AR 15 in my patrol vehicle. The same one that many other citizens own.

You do realize with proper ammunition, the AR 15 penetrates less then handgun calibers. It also tends to fragment, which in turn causes less damage if a miss of the intended target occurs (like if you shot at an intruder, missed and it traveled through a wall). Pistols overpenetrate. IMO and many others who are way more experienced, the .223/.556 is the ideal close quarters/home defense round.

I guess if it were up to most of you, we would all go back to carrying 38 special revolvers and Remington 870 shotguns. Both are great weapons and were sufficent during their times. Unfortunately they are not sufficent to deal with what we have to nowadays. I cite the hollywood bank robbery and numerous other incidents to back that up.

Maybe you should start a change. Become a police officer and only carry a revolver and shotgun. Maybe it will catch on again.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000
You say that you want a cop and not a solider. I get that. However, everything we have can be owned by citizens.

As I previously stated, should we not have access to the same weaponry as the citizens do? Just like all citizens should have access to the weapons the police have.

I want a straight answer. If you feel like we should only be allowed revolvers and shotguns say it.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig


I find it funny that when gun grabbers refer to an AR 15 as an "assault weapon" people are quick to correct them (rightfully so). Yet they then in turn say that they don't want police officers having miltary style weaponry. Pot meet keetle.


It's rare I actually have the opportunity to say this these days...but with a couple thousand for the table price, another thousand or so for processing and a $200 tax stamp, I can have a full automatic weapon in my safe without any additional hassle. Should cops then say that ability of the private citizen justifies a FURTHER escalation in the arms race to ..what? air support and mini guns? After all... I CAN get a Mini-Gun too, if I want to spend about twice what my house cost me. You can see private citizens firing them at the Knob Creek shoot every year though.

For that matter, all manner of .30 was coming home in the 50's and 60's by the surplus program. That dramatically outgunned the cops of the time. I think their answer then was a justice system that kept the threats in society...OUT of society...so they didn't get a dozen predatory crimes before maybe getting the door slammed on them after that.


Now there is absolutely NO limit to the level which can be justified in the name of security and 'matching the capability' of projected threats. Literally.. NO limit. They got AT-4 Rockets (empty tubes..but it still scared the cops plenty) at an LAPD turn in. They reported it as Anti-Tank weapons. Should that have then demanded armor upgrades to patrol units? After all... One live tube and it's a 2 man unit that doesn't exist anymore. Surely... That MUST demand a response..on the off chance one gets loose from 29 Palms or the Barstow Depot.

So..do I have a problem with city patrol units carrying rifles that can go THROUGH the house in the sights and kill a child in a house on the OTHER side of it? Hell yes I have a problem.

You talk about ammo..and I know all about frangible ammo. I had to use it in a tire kill house for tactical training. I recall the price of it too, and the fact our local department doesn't splurge for that outside their own tire house. What they are using here is surplus as I've seen. Also known as green tip. I have a few boxes of it myself I need to get rid of, since I dumped the rifle they load into...but those are steel core. They don't splatter and aren't designed to.

Again...I can understand how having the weapons daily makes you totally immune to the psychological impact and the issues of them. To the citizenry though? We're just watching a police force for a Nation of law, created for freedom ...become a nation of law enforcement and heavy on incarceration or rehabilitation.

It's a trend that's gone too far as it is, in many opinions.

edit on 21-4-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig


I want a straight answer. If you feel like we should only be allowed revolvers and shotguns say it.
- See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Consider it so said...with the exception I've already made of heavy hardware and weapons available in a department vault in the event of civil emergency, major disaster or ...who knows anymore...the outbreak of war. Every police force SHOULD have the capability to become much more than a collection of beat cops helping a peaceful community.....IF the situation has already become apparent.

Carrying the hardware to handle what hasn't happened.....has people looking for what situations ARE appropriate, since it's all there anyway...and that's human nature. That's the problem.
edit on 21-4-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

en.wikipedia.org...

It is a way for the Fed Govt to strike down the public, and skirt the laws.

Since the Military can't be used, stand the LE agencies up with the same equipment.



posted on Apr, 21 2014 @ 10:18 AM
link   
if all that money was spent on peace
we would have it

eta
oh yeah, Obama in 2008 said he wanted a civilian army just as big and just as well equipped ...
blablabla... waco..blabla... bundy...bla...ruby ridge...blabla no knock...kill your pet raids..bla
any how...here's to creating markets...
edit on Monam4b20144America/Chicago17 by Danbones because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join