TexasCHLforum.com

CowboyEngineer wrote:I went from foil to sheet metal hats a few years ago. Who at the social security admin carries a gun. Do they have their own cops, or security?

Almost every federal agency has their own LEOs.

For SSA, these are the guys tracking down social security fraud.

I do think it's insane how many fed LEOs we have, though.

74novaman wrote:Depending on the amount of tin foil you're wearing (Shamelessly stolen from another poster on another site)

1) the fiscal year is coming to a close (use it or lose it)
2) Recent high profile shootings has agencies worried about public safety, so more ammo for training.
3) Recent high profile scandals has agencies worried about agent safety, so more ammo for training.
4) Stir up panic buying.
5) FEMA camps.

Pick your poison.

Even number 1 makes me mad. No wonder we have an out of control govt spending issue. "Oh no! Its almost the end of the fiscal year! Quick, spend all the money!"

Buddy, I am here to tell you that stuff DOES happen...I've seen it where troops in my unit couldn't get new boots because we didn't have money "in the right pot"...but at the end of the year, lo-and-behold, there was enough left over to buy several big-screen TVs to post POWERPOINT SLIDES of "safety messages"...and yes, they MUST spend it or they get cut by that much the next year, and since no one knows what will happen next year, no one wants to be caught short...whether it is or is not the reason for these crazy large ammo purchases by Federal agencies, though, is anyone's guess.

46000 rounds with 500 targets equals 92 rounds per target. That should be enough to qualify.

philip964 wrote:I saw this ammo buying by some weird govt agency earlier and thought, "I don't want them to question me when I buy ammo, so why should I question them. "

You buying ammo = private citizen spending your own money.
Government buying ammo = public agencies spending your money.

We the American people have a right to know what these agencies are buying and why.

CowboyEngineer wrote:I went from foil to sheet metal hats a few years ago. Who at the social security admin carries a gun. Do they have their own cops, or security?

The Dept of Education even has its own SWAT team.

http://www.news10.net/news/article/1411 ... ckton-home

Heartland Patriot wrote:

74novaman wrote:Depending on the amount of tin foil you're wearing (Shamelessly stolen from another poster on another site)

1) the fiscal year is coming to a close (use it or lose it)
2) Recent high profile shootings has agencies worried about public safety, so more ammo for training.
3) Recent high profile scandals has agencies worried about agent safety, so more ammo for training.
4) Stir up panic buying.
5) FEMA camps.

Pick your poison.

Even number 1 makes me mad. No wonder we have an out of control govt spending issue. "Oh no! Its almost the end of the fiscal year! Quick, spend all the money!"

Buddy, I am here to tell you that stuff DOES happen...I've seen it where troops in my unit couldn't get new boots because we didn't have money "in the right pot"...but at the end of the year, lo-and-behold, there was enough left over to buy several big-screen TVs to post POWERPOINT SLIDES of "safety messages"...and yes, they MUST spend it or they get cut by that much the next year, and since no one knows what will happen next year, no one wants to be caught short...whether it is or is not the reason for these crazy large ammo purchases by Federal agencies, though, is anyone's guess.

It's nothing new. When I was a young captain in '81 I was rear echelon commander near the end of the year. I got called one day and told they'd just dropped $10K* in my account and to go spend it. Two days later I got the same call and said, I already did. They said, no, this is another $10K. Happened at least one more time. And you're right, it was in all in one account for things I had a years supply worth (which, of course, would be gone in three months) but not in accounts for things I really needed.

*Remember, '81 dollars. That's like, what, a gazillion now.

It's not unreasonable to suggest that the soc. sec. admin. is preparing, in some way, for civil unrest. The question is, who in the world would threaten the soc. sec. administration? Would it be gray haired old grandmas, or someone else? Would the soc. sec. folks really turn guns on grandma? Or would it be more likely that occupy wall st. folks might get out of hand, and storm the closest federal institution? I think the feds have not so much to worry about with grandma, but there is a pretty large contingent of nuts massing out there from time to time for radical political causes on the left. I still wonder who the feds think their enemy is.

Thought SSA was broke? They're either planning to defend what's left or start collecting. Option 3 is they are going to go enforce at-birth life expectancies.

CowboyEngineer wrote:I went from foil to sheet metal hats a few years ago. Who at the social security admin carries a gun. Do they have their own cops, or security?

Who? Cranky seniors who are about to lose their SS because hacks in DC were horrible stewards of the payroll contributions.

The Dept of Education even has its own SWAT team.

is that to deal with unruly students, or to protect the childrens from 'future-former' gov't agents who think they
are the only one in the room 'professional' enough to carry a Glock 40.......bang! .....oops......

The Annoyed Man wrote:DHS has purchased about a half million rounds of 5.56 this year.

Never fight fire with fire, I need to go to the 5.56 or 308 thread and suggest 308, better to reach out and touch someone than battle on equal ground.....

Now, now..........remember...no HEAVY weapons!

If memory serves, the incident was a dept of education swat team in California that did its own home invasion to collect a student loan debt within the past year or 2. Turns out the student was the man's ex-wife, who no longer lived at the home that was stormed. I seem to recall the raid occurred in the early morning hours, while the man and his kids were asleep. The swat guys had their guns pointing in the homeowner's face, pulled him out of his house, and secured the premises. Then, I suppose they had their "never mind" moment. Your federal department of education at work. Think and let that phrase sink in. Department of education. 1984 has arrived, in many more ways than one.

fickman wrote:

RPBrown wrote:Guess I better start getting some more ammo. This is as good of an excuse as any

A few weeks ago we were out at a family cabin and, out of nowhere, my wife said, "I don't think we have enough ammo at home. Shouldn't we have more than we do?" It was a proud moment for me. . . this is the girl who cried the first time she was around a gun being shot (out in the country - it was my LEO BIL's .40 about 9 years ago). . . she grew up in an anti house and had no experience around firearms. Since then, she's gotten her CHL, carries daily, recently moved to carrying on-person, has gone through a renewal, can out-shoot me. . . and now - NOW - she wants us to stockpile some ammo.

Thanks for reminding me.

Very cool. My wife is plenty supportive, but she's never said anything like that. Sometimes, I even have to talk her out of a gun. We do have other responsibilities. I mentioned Pug's Winchester he's got for sale and she asked, "How much?"

philip964 wrote:I saw this ammo buying by some weird govt agency earlier and thought, "I don't want them to question me when I buy ammo, so why should I question them. "

We spend our own money. However, the Guvment is also spending our money. Or the Chinese's money, depending on how you look at it. Either way, we the people are paying the bill.