View Full Version : DHS buying armored cars
http://www.businessinsider.com/homeland-security-serving-warrants-mrap-2013-3
The Department of Homeland Security has acquired 16 military-style, mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles for use inside the U.S., according to an official spokesman. The MRAP, as it's known in the U.S. military, was fielded in 2007 to counter the threat of devastating roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The vehicle has been modified for use with the DHS Special Response Team — specially trained, fully armored agents dispatched during the most severe and high risk situations, according to WOAI.
"[The vehicle] is used in the execution of high-risk warrants — including drug trafficking, smuggling, and contraband," Ross Feinstein, a spokesman for DHS, told Business Insider. "We have 16 MRAPs nationwide."
A few billion bullets are one thing but armored vehicles? What's next, tanks and artillery?
Video for the reading challenged.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pS9aw5pcJo&feature=player_embedded
Ducimus
03-05-13, 09:37 AM
I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.
Your welcome:salute: don't forget the 50 million dollars they will give a mexican company for uniforms.
Onkel Neal
03-05-13, 09:41 AM
Oh, boy, here we go again.:shifty:
nikimcbee
03-05-13, 10:00 AM
Oh, boy, here we go again.:shifty:
Neal, please don't hijack August's thread with Whitesnake references!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3MXiTeH_Pg
nikimcbee
03-05-13, 10:07 AM
When I saw "DHS", I thought it was Dept Human Services.:doh:
So now they can enter the Favelas, er I mean Detroit, safely.
Well, they've got to get their sofas to people somehow!
http://www.dfs.co.uk/
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 11:34 AM
My God...16 vehicles to cover the entire country? Head for the hills. Arm yourselves. Run! Don't look back.
16 vehicles are not enough to cover Washington DC let alone the country. SWAT has special vehicles. No one says anything about that.
SWAT City of Palm Springs:
http://palmspringsca.gov/Modules/ShowImage.aspx?imageid=221
Very soon there will be Huey armed to the teeth for crowd control.
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 11:36 AM
Your welcome:salute: don't forget the 50 million dollars they will give a mexican company for uniforms.
I think they are compensated in peso. :hmmm:
My God...16 vehicles to cover the entire country? Head for the hills. Arm yourselves. Run! Don't look back.
16 vehicles are not enough to cover Washington DC let alone the country. SWAT has special vehicles. No one says anything about that.
If SWAT has them why does DHS also need them?
Tribesman
03-05-13, 11:39 AM
A few billion bullets are one thing but armored vehicles? What's next, tanks and artillery?
This is outrageous, why are they buying MRAPs, why can't they just have Cadillac V-150 armoured cars like the traffic cops.:rotfl2:
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 11:45 AM
If SWAT has them why does DHS also need them?
August, after 9/11 all agencies are now governed under DHS. Even the TSA checking frigging bags at the airport are part of the overall entity known as the DHS. All bodies under this umbrella of the DHS(including FEMA) have one task at hand. Protect the US and the people within the borders. This includes protection from nuts already within the borders just down the street cutting his lawn.
August, after 9/11 all agencies are now governed under DHS. Even the TSA checking frigging bags at the airport are part of the overall entity known as the DHS. All bodies under this umbrella of the DHS(including FEMA) have one task at hand. Protect the US and the people within the borders. This includes protection from nuts already within the borders just down the street cutting his lawn.
Yeah them lawn cutters need to be eradicated!
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 11:53 AM
Armor vehicles have been around for decades. Used for any purpose necessary. Including the ones needing to be eradicated. I do not see a issue here.
Armor vehicles have been around for decades. Used for any purpose necessary. Including the ones needing to be eradicated. I do not see a issue here.
Drones, Police Infantry, armored vehicles, secret courts, detention without trial, warrant-less searches. Yeah you must be right, nothing to see here...
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 12:22 PM
Drones, Police Infantry, armored vehicles, secret courts, detention without trial, warrant-less searches. Yeah you must be right, nothing to see here...
Drones, a new tech. What is the difference between a drone and a police helicopter? One manned, the other not. What is the point of this comment? Infantry? A bunch of cops together usually is for riots. Riots have occurred for decades. Watts comes to mind. Detention without trial. Do you have a particular case in mind? Warrant-less searches? Gone of for decades. You are painting a horse a different color. It is however the same horse.
Drones, a new tech. What is the difference between a drone and a police helicopter? One manned, the other not.
What is the point of this comment? Infantry? A bunch of cops together usually is for riots. Riots have occurred for decades. Watts comes to mind. Detention without trial. Do you have a particular case in mind? Warrant-less searches? Gone of for decades. You are painting a horse a different color. It is however the same horse.
Doesn't matter how long they have gotten away with it. I see it all as links in the same chain. Apparently you don't.
Betonov
03-05-13, 12:29 PM
It's a PR stunt, like our police showed of their new water cannon and sang praises about how effective and modern we will be fighting riots....
It was used for 10 years as a mobile garden hose. Saw some action in december, used against 5 rioters.
TLAM Strike
03-05-13, 12:41 PM
Very soon there will be Huey armed to the teeth for crowd control.
Naw they will use modified Gazelles. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Thunder)
Catfish
03-05-13, 02:02 PM
Don't forget the estimated 30,000 drones patroling the US, in the next years :hmmm:
They will be used everywhere of course, not only in the US, for whatever purpose ..
There's one advantage however, with all the eMail traffic and surveillance videos to check in the US alone by NSA, CIA, FBI, whatever, there will never be unemployment again :-?
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 04:05 PM
Doesn't matter how long they have gotten away with it. I see it all as links in the same chain. Apparently you don't.
August, I work daily with the TSA, FEMA, DHS and the other entities encompassed within. There is no chain sir.
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 04:06 PM
Naw they will use modified Gazelles. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Thunder)
I watched Blue Thunder in the movie theaters. That will date me for sure. :haha:
The whisper mode scene with chick in the window. Sweet. :yeah:
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 04:12 PM
It's a PR stunt, like our police showed of their new water cannon and sang praises about how effective and modern we will be fighting riots....
It was used for 10 years as a mobile garden hose. Saw some action in december, used against 5 rioters.
:rotfl2::rotfl2::har:
Platapus
03-05-13, 04:34 PM
Although it tends to kill the tin-foil hat conspiracy angle, one should remember that ICE has offices overseas.
According to this document
http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_10-38_Jan10.pdf
Vehicle Acquisitions for Field Offices
Prior to FY 2008, individual attaché offices completed the
procurement process for all vehicles overseas. After learning that
a senior ICE OIA official at one post was able to steer $2.8 million
in sole source U.S. government contracts to a foreign company for
purchasing and armoring vehicles, ICE OIA implemented changes
to its vehicle acquisition process. Specifically, ICE OIA
headquarters now conducts the acquisition of armored vehicles for
all overseas offices and sole source purchases are not allowed. All
armored vehicles must now be purchased and armored in the
United States and then shipped to the foreign post
That's what the armored vehicles are purchased for.
BTW, in FY 2008 when G W Bush was in office, ICE spent several million dollars in acquiring armored vehicles. Where was the "concern" then?
Platapus
03-05-13, 04:41 PM
FYI
ICE has 71 offices in 47 countries.
http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1203/120327washingtondc.htm
geetrue
03-05-13, 05:16 PM
FYI
ICE has 71 offices in 47 countries.
http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1203/120327washingtondc.htm
I love ICE especially when they are on Border Wars shows.
They look very professional more so than Homeland Security, are you sure they call themselves DHS?
I never heard that one before.
Why don't they save some money here and use President Obama's old Canadian built campaign buses lol
http://www.truthorfiction.com/images/Greyhound1b.jpg
The Truth: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/greyhound1.htm
The Federal Government acquired two new buses that cost $1.1 Million each. The basic touring coaches were built in Canada but they were purchased from a dealer in Tennessee who specially modified them to accommodate the President or candidates under the protection of the Secret Service.
Stealhead
03-05-13, 05:24 PM
I love ICE especially when they are on Border Wars shows.
They look very professional more so than Homeland Security, are you sure they call themselves DHS?
I never heard that one before.
Why don't they save some money here and use President Obama's old Canadian built campaign buses lol
http://www.truthorfiction.com/images/Greyhound1b.jpg
The Truth: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/greyhound1.htm
I am certain that they are a part of DHS: http://www.ice.gov/about/overview/
geetrue
03-05-13, 05:36 PM
Lots of DHS's out there I didn't know about:
Related Searches
DHS Minnesota (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Minnesota&FORM=R5FD)
DHS Arkansas (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Arkansas&FORM=R5FD1)
DHS Illinois (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Illinois&FORM=R5FD2)
DHS Oregon (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Oregon&FORM=R5FD3)
DHS Housing (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Housing&FORM=R5FD4)
DHS Forms (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Forms&FORM=R5FD5)
DHS Iowa (http://www.bing.com/search?q=DHS+Iowa&FORM=R5FD6)
Michigan DHS (http://www.bing.com/search?q=Michigan+DHS&FORM=R5FD7)
Learn something new everyday ... that's what I'll do to stay away from the VA second floor
( that's where they keep the you know what's)
Stealhead
03-05-13, 05:44 PM
Those are for various states Department of Human Services and are not related to the Department of Homeland Security same acronym different meaning.
Here is a list of what agencies are a part of the Department of Homeland Security top of page right hand side under "Child Agencies" :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security
Never mind you are making fun of yourself in your last post I believe.
geetrue
03-05-13, 05:55 PM
Those are for various states Department of Human Services and are not related to the Department of Homeland Security same acronym different meaning.
Here is a list of what agencies are a part of the Department of Homeland Security top of page right hand side under "Child Agencies" :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security
Never mind you are making fun of yourself in your last post I believe.
Yes, I was making fun of myself ... I'm kind of old, but you sir have pointed me in the right direction.
This is why I just call them the Dr. Pepper agencies
the creation of DHS constituted the most significant government reorganization since the Cold War,[ and the most substantial reorganization of federal agencies since the National Security Act of 1947 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_1947), which placed the different military (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forces) departments under a secretary of defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_Defense) and created the National Security Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Security_Council) and Central Intelligence Agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency).
DHS also constitutes the most diverse merger of federal functions and responsibilities, incorporating 22 government agencies into a single organization.
AVGWarhawk
03-05-13, 06:05 PM
I love ICE especially when they are on Border Wars shows.
They look very professional more so than Homeland Security, are you sure they call themselves DHS?
I never heard that one before.
Why don't they save some money here and use President Obama's old Canadian built campaign buses lol
Geetrue, the agencies keep their previous names. TSA, ICE, FEMA, NSA. Together they make up the DHS.
August, I work daily with the TSA, FEMA, DHS and the other entities encompassed within. There is no chain sir.
I didn't mean it as a organized entity planning it all. As you say this has been going on for decades. I don't buy the theory that some shadowy group of puppet masters could be pulling our strings for all those years in secret.
No, giving an armored assault capability to a federal police force is not part of some dark conspiracy. But it is just one more thing that a future tyrant could use to oppress us. I question the need for it. We already have those capabilities at the state and even the local level. Do we really need the Feds rolling armored vehicles too?
geetrue
03-05-13, 06:23 PM
Geetrue, the agencies keep their previous names. TSA, ICE, FEMA, NSA. Together they make up the DHS.
Thank you for opening my eyes ... I'm reading about them right now and it's not easy to understand what I have always taken for granted in those two words "Homeland Security"
This was from Steelheads link:
Organizational Structure
Final deliverables have been produced for the following workshops:
Cyber Security Phase II (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/Internet_Security_Alliance.html)
Lessons Learned from Hurricane Katrina (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/Katrina.htm)
Emergency Communications (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/EC.htm)
Perimeter Security (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/Perimeter.htm)
Enterprise Power Security and Continuity (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/Power.htm)
Biometrics (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/Biometrics.htm)
Biological and Chemical Threat Agents (http://publicaa.ansi.org/sites/apdl/Documents/Standards%20Activities/Homeland%20Security%20Standards%20Panel/ANSI_HSSP_Workshops/Bio_Chem.htm)
I get tired easy and it made me realize how much reading ya'll have to do that work for DHS ...
Why would anyone want to read what's on the NYT best sellers list after having to work for a DHS all week?
Time to organize them like they do on FBM's with two crews blue and gold ...
perhaps X amount days on and X amount of days off to save a buck or two plus use less personel and get more work done.
Thank you August by making fun of DHS you have opened my eyes
I have to go back to reading now ...
did you know they have a new DHS building planned for 2021 in the works?
The new DHS headquarters campus is now slated to open in 2021. The five-year delay is due primarily to spending cuts in construction funds imposed by Congress. In fiscal 2011, DHS and the GSA.
General Services Administration (GSA; which oversees construction for DHS) requested $668 million for construction and consolidation but received only $77 million.
In fiscal 2012, DHS and GSA requested $377 million but received only $106 million. In fiscal 2013, President Obama's budget suggested giving GSA $56 million in construction funds, and DHS $89 million (to be used primarily for local road improvements and for moving the Coast Guard into its new building). The two agencies had requested $460 million.
the_tyrant
03-05-13, 06:49 PM
When I first saw the post, I thought it was DHL, aka, the courier guys....
Question for any former/current military or law enforcement individuals (Americans) here:
If you were given the order to pull the trigger on your fellow American citizens, would you?
Edit:
And how many of your fellow soldiers would have?
It is one thing to have such things,, it is another to keep them, they will have to be park some where, and if and when things go south, that's where the food, water, fuel, ammo and weapons will be like a regular post ahpopoliptic georcery store, a regular fort apache have a good time stepping upon peoples liberty remeber there will be more have nots than haves..the last thing I would want to deal with is a angery and hungery mob...
Stealhead
03-05-13, 07:29 PM
Question for any former/current military or law enforcement individuals (Americans) here:
If you were given the order to pull the trigger on your fellow American citizens, would you?
Edit:
And how many of your fellow soldiers would have?
More information is needed to answer this question.
A US citizen may decide to rob a bank and then he may murder or attempt to murder another US citizen in that case I would pull the trigger on such a person.Or he may become a threat to the people and join an organization that is a threat to the people and/or the Constitution in that case i would pull the trigger on that person if violence where the only recourse.
The oath sworn states that you will defend the people from any enemy foreign or domestic. A threat to the people to the Constitution can come from outside or within. In other words if the order given is constitutional and valid and just then the trigger shall be pulled.
Honestly I cant say on the second part there a many different people in the military and views vary greatly some are very conservative some are liberal others have no interest in politics.In my experience the political make up armed forces members is as varied as it is in the general population.
More information is needed to answer this question.
I think you answered it sufficiently. From reading your answer, it sounds like you'd actually think before pulling the trigger, and not just fire blindly at anyone the government pointed you at.
From reading certain posts here, I was under the impression that anyone with a government issued gun was just waiting to start killing people on the government's orders.
Stealhead
03-05-13, 08:44 PM
I think you answered it sufficiently. From reading your answer, it sounds like you'd actually think before pulling the trigger, and not just fire blindly at anyone the government pointed you at.
From reading certain posts here, I was under the impression that anyone with a government issued gun was just waiting to start killing people on the government's orders.
It could depend on the individual person though to some extent a person may swear one thing but their integrity may be weak but the goal of the oath is to insure that those in a government position uphold the Constitution.
In theory this prevents a situation where a leader garbs total control from ever happening because those who are to carry out those orders would refuse to obey one that violated the Constitution.
Things have been done many times that in some way where violating the Constitution though.An often ignored example would be Richard Nixon's secret war in Cambodia.
It was members of the military that blew the whistle on this and reported it to Congress.Of course these military officers had been given orders from elsewhere which means that other military members had given these orders even though they where unlawful and not approved by Congress(a war) and where essentially ordering a mission and then having the record of that mission destroyed as soon as the aircrew landed.
Of course Nixon did not nearly get impeached for this violation of office but over a different violation.
You could say that there is a check and balance so to speak when it comes to the "pull the trigger order" on a mass scale such a thing would not fly with those compelled to obey their is a stipulation(does it violate the Constitution and the sworn oath to uphold it)
When I first saw the post, I thought it was DHL, aka, the courier guys....
Now those guys NEED armoured cars. :O:
The thing is you're not talking about the military but an agency. A much smaller and far more easily subverted organization.
Stealhead
03-05-13, 10:21 PM
The thing is you're not talking about the military but an agency. A much smaller and far more easily subverted organization.
I would argue that the larger an agency/organization becomes the more more likely it is to be subverted.The truth is no matter what kind of law a nation has power can be taken if a person or group so desires.
Humans are corruptible by nature to some extent and therefore it is possible for any organization to be corrupted.The only form of government safe from this is no government at all... anarchy.
I would argue that the larger an agency/organization becomes the more more likely it is to be subverted.
I don't see how. The larger the organization the more dissenting opinions that one would have to deal with. The military is hundreds of thousands of people. A federal agency is a few hundred agents.
The truth is no matter what kind of law a nation has power can be taken if a person or group so desires.
Humans are corruptible by nature to some extent and therefore it is possible for any organization to be corrupted.Desire means little unless the mechanics are in place to carry it out. Giving federal law enforcement agencies armored assault capability, in essence creating a mini-army, is just one more step in that direction. Why is this even necessary? The National Guard should have such vehicles available for use if law enforcement needs to use them.
The only form of government safe from this is no government at all... anarchy.No such thing. No matter how completely any social system breaks down some type of replacement will quickly manifest itself for no other reason that it increases the survival chances of it's members. Humanity 101. Organize or die.
Stealhead
03-06-13, 12:17 AM
A definition of anarchy is a state of society without government or law.
I simply stated that the situation where corruption of a government in part or whole is ensured not to occur is in a state of anarchy.
If a person wishes to gain power in a tyrannical manner they must in some way legitimatize them selves to a portion of the population they wish to control.If they are in a land that has a government then their means is to corruptly alter things to their will.I am not saying that anarchy is ideal people need to have some control in their lives.
There are Army National Guard units that have M1A1 even A2 Abrams tanks I am pretty sure that they can handle any DHS armored car.There are Air National Guard units flying A-10s they can destroy any DHS armored car.Every NG unit that has infantry is going to have some AT-4s in the armory those can destroy armored cars.
http://www.idaho.ang.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123325417
http://www.175wg.ang.af.mil/resources/
http://www.minnesotanationalguard.org/units/unit_template.php?unit=PSSC2
http://www.nationalguard.mil/news/archives/2012/06/060612-tanks-print.aspx
There are Army National Guard units that have M1A1 even A2 Abrams tanks I am pretty sure that they can handle any DHS armored car.There are Air National Guard units flying A-10s they can destroy any DHS armored car.Every NG unit that has infantry is going to have some AT-4s in the armory those can destroy armored cars.
You miss the point.
If the local NG already has these vehicles, or better ones, then those are what DHS ought to be using. They shouldn't have their own.
Platapus
03-06-13, 10:09 AM
Question for any former/current military or law enforcement individuals (Americans) here:
If you were given the order to pull the trigger on your fellow American citizens, would you?
Edit:
And how many of your fellow soldiers would have?
It would also depend on the circumstances.
If out of the blue, the POTUS says "Hey! shoot those Americans", I would have a hard time determining whether that is a legal order.
On the other hand, if we have Americans engaged in violent acts against citizens; if they are trying to overthrow our government through violent and unconstitutional ways; if my orders are to secure an area against hostile forces, and I get the order to shoot Americans, I would follow my orders and shoot the violent offenders.
At least I hope I would. In my military career, I was never ordered to shoot Americans, but I was put in many situations where, in safeguarding nuclear material, I had the authorization to protect the material from any unauthorized people. Since I was in Utah at the time, I don't think they were concerned with the ruskies, but from Americans.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 10:45 AM
No, giving an armored assault capability to a federal police force is not part of some dark conspiracy. But it is just one more thing that a future tyrant could use to oppress us. I question the need for it. We already have those capabilities at the state and even the local level. Do we really need the Feds rolling armored vehicles too?
Your are naturally assuming these are for fed use only. Feds pay for roads as well. Have for decades. Part of the master plan to use these armored vehicles? :hmmm: As for one more thing to oppress us...armored vehicles have been available to all law enforcement agencies and the fed for decades. Have you been oppressed at any time? Has anyone suggested(other than the loons on the internet) that these vehicles will be used to oppress some guy in CT? Future tyrant? Have we seen on these shores a tyrant running the country? Feds do roll around in armored vehicles. Normally these a black in color. Look like Chevy Blazers or Cadillacs. Sometimes these vehicles are followed by black helicopters. These vehicle have been around for a long time because there are some very real threats out there. Being vigilant has multiplied exponentially since 9/11. Let's face it, we were standing there with our pants down. Now that the DHS is working on securing the country, working towards a more effective FEMA and attempting to get organized within yet a red flag goes up because of these activities. If a natural disaster of large proportions were to occur requiring thousands of Rubber Main coffins immediately, yet FEMA could not provide timely, there would be a outcry. Can't have it both ways. Luck favors the prepared.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 10:49 AM
On the other hand, if we have Americans engaged in violent acts against citizens; if they are trying to overthrow our government through violent and unconstitutional ways; if my orders are to secure an area against hostile forces, and I get the order to shoot Americans, I would follow my orders and shoot the violent offenders.
I would be inclined to believe the Americans demonstrating violent acts and attempting to overthrow the government are no longer citizens. These individuals are now subject to deadly force as a result of their actions.
Peaceful demonstrations are permitted. We have seen many peaceful demonstrations.
Platapus
03-06-13, 10:53 AM
I would be inclined to believe the Americans demonstrating violent acts and attempting to overthrow the government are no longer citizens.
It takes a lot for the government to revoke citizenship of native born Americans. That does, and should always, take a lot of legal review.
So in my opinion, these individuals would still be citizens, just criminals.
Tribesman
03-06-13, 11:15 AM
You miss the point.
If the local NG already has these vehicles, or better ones, then those are what DHS ought to be using. They shouldn't have their own.
Why does the navy have helicopters, they should use the army ones, why does the airforce have trucks, they can use the armys too. Why is there even a marine corps, surely the navy can borrow troops from the army and do away with the whole seperate branch and all their seperate equipment.
Makes as much sense as Augusts line doesn't it.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 11:16 AM
It takes a lot for the government to revoke citizenship of native born Americans. That does, and should always, take a lot of legal review.
So in my opinion, these individuals would still be citizens, just criminals.
Yes, criminals.
Your are naturally assuming these are for fed use only. Feds pay for roads as well. Have for decades. Part of the master plan to use these armored vehicles? :hmmm: As for one more thing to oppress us...armored vehicles have been available to all law enforcement agencies and the fed for decades. Have you been oppressed at any time? Has anyone suggested(other than the loons on the internet) that these vehicles will be used to oppress some guy in CT? Future tyrant? Have we seen on these shores a tyrant running the country? Feds do roll around in armored vehicles. Normally these a black in color. Look like Chevy Blazers or Cadillacs. Sometimes these vehicles are followed by black helicopters. These vehicle have been around for a long time because there are some very real threats out there. Being vigilant has multiplied exponentially since 9/11. Let's face it, we were standing there with our pants down. Now that the DHS is working on securing the country, working towards a more effective FEMA and attempting to get organized within yet a red flag goes up because of these activities. If a natural disaster of large proportions were to occur requiring thousands of Rubber Main coffins immediately, yet FEMA could not provide timely, there would be a outcry. Can't have it both ways. Luck favors the prepared.
If it were up to me I would disband both DHS and FEMA. The Federal Government shouldn't be in the disaster recovery or the law enforcement businesses. Both should be strictly state run functions.
And BTW just because the Feds haven't attacked civilians recently they have in the past and only a fool would figure they never would do so again.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 12:03 PM
If it were up to me I would disband both DHS and FEMA. The Federal Government shouldn't be in the disaster recovery or the law enforcement businesses. Both should be strictly state run functions.
FEMA oversees other places other than the states. PR and VI. Other countries benefit from FEMA. Haiti for example. Pago Pago(American Samoa). Guam. Saipan....these territories benefit from FEMA when disaster strikes. As for each state handling disasters....they do. Maryland had MEMA. Florida has their own emergency response. MS, LA, TX, AL, etc. If the state is inundated and require more supplies they turn to FEMA.
As for law enforcement, maybe not local enforcement but international law enforcement...who is going to enforce it?
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 12:04 PM
And BTW just because the Feds haven't attacked civilians recently they have in the past and only a fool would figure they never would do so again.
Who here said they would never do it again? I'm sure another Waco will come about.
FEMA oversees other places other than the states. PR and VI. Other countries benefit from FEMA. Haiti for example. Pago Pago(American Samoa). Guam. Saipan....these territories benefit from FEMA when disaster strikes.
Fine then limit it to overseas territories. As you say the states already have their own emergency management, no need for duplication on the federal level. I might be agreeable to a federal fund to help out the state agency with paying for it all but anything more direct ought to be supplied by the US military. We don't need a bunch of separate organizations doing the same job.
As for law enforcement, maybe not local enforcement but
international law enforcement...who is going to enforce it?
International law? Last I checked the US Constitution was the supreme law of this land. Perhaps you meant Federal law? If so then part of the problem is there are way too many Federal laws. Taking out street gang members like what was envisioned as a possible use for these armored vehicles should be a state function.
Spike88
03-06-13, 12:37 PM
At least I hope I would. In my military career, I was never ordered to shoot Americans, but I was put in many situations where, in safeguarding nuclear material, I had the authorization to protect the material from any unauthorized people. Since I was in Utah at the time, I don't think they were concerned with the ruskies, but from Americans.
My cousin is enlisted in the Air Force and was tasked with defending an ICBM silo. During one of his shifts a man entered the premises with a raised shotgun. My cousin shot the man and killed him, only to find out that the guy had a suicide note. He wanted to die, but for whatever reason couldn't do it himself, so he entered the base with the intent of dying.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 12:39 PM
Fine then limit it to overseas territories. As you say the states already have their own emergency management, no need for duplication on the federal level. I might be agreeable to a federal fund to help out the state agency with paying for it all but anything more direct ought to be supplied by the US military. We don't need a bunch of separate organizations doing the same job.
International law? Last I checked the US Constitution was the supreme law of this land. Perhaps you meant Federal law? If so then part of the problem is there are way too many Federal laws. Taking out street gang members like what was envisioned as a possible use for these armored vehicles should be a state function.
Wrong...the states do not have the resources to cover all disasters. Do you realize how fast water for drinking(bottled water) would be consumed in NY if Sandy was worse than it already was? NY does not have enough water to last the afternoon. The Fed does fund for disasters. What, Christy got 6 billion for his state? Funding does not get water to disaster victims within a reasonable amount of time. Water already staged at distribution centers does. Disasters are 4 fold. Immediate response, continued response, clean up and rebuild. Just because it is not on the news does not mean everything is back to normal. Far from it. As for separate organization doing the same job, none really do. The National Guard might assist. They have Hummers and helicopters. FEMA does not. FEMA can not commander a aircraft carrier to take water to HI if needed. But the Navy sure can if asked. FEMA does not own the USS Comfort and deploy the vessel to Haiti. Each organization can do certain things other can't. I would like to say it goes smoothly but often it does not. However, it is better if any or none of the organizations did not exist.
No, I meant International law. Federal and local laws can be handled by cops.
Platapus
03-06-13, 01:13 PM
My cousin is enlisted in the Air Force and was tasked with defending an ICBM silo. During one of his shifts a man entered the premises with a raised shotgun. My cousin shot the man and killed him, only to find out that the guy had a suicide note. He wanted to die, but for whatever reason couldn't do it himself, so he entered the base with the intent of dying.
That must have been tough for your cousin. Sorry to hear that your cousin had to go through that. "Suicide by cop" can be devastating to the officer, unwittingly involved in the suicide plot.
NY does not have enough water to last the afternoon.
Then New Yorks emergency management plans are woefully insufficient for it's population. The state is failing in it's basic duty. The feds would be far better off just making sure that the states plans are up to snuff than it is doing their job for them
No, I meant International law.
What international law has the Federal government ever arrested it's own citizens for violating on US territory? One that would require them to have armored assault capability to enforce.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 01:43 PM
Then New Yorks emergency management plans are woefully insufficient for it's population. The state is failing in it's basic duty. The feds would be far better off just making sure that the states plans are up to snuff than it is doing their job for them
What international law has the Federal government ever arrested it's own citizens for violating on US territory? One that would require them to have armored assault capability to enforce.
Ok August, the great state of Massachusetts needs your tax dollars to raise enough MRE/water/blankets/tarps/generators/forklifts/trailers/tractors/John Deere gators/4-wheel drive vehicles to cover everyone in the state. It will be an additional $1000.00 per household per year. Expect a yearly increase. But it does not stop there. Water only last so long and needs to be disposed of so fresh water can be purchased. This is ongoing throughout the year. The warehouse facilities will need to be manned and maintained. Plus, the state will need to add another 50 strategically located warehouses. This of course comes at a cost. We will need for you to pay more "Emergency Tax" to be less woefully prepared. We will need your first installment by tomorrow. Furthermore, have the electrical company purchase more trucks and crews so other companies from other states do not have to come to MA to assist with outages. Bear in mind to cover costs your gas/electric bill will have a nice increase. We after all can not be woefully insufficient in repair crews.
The last time I checked people help people, states help states and the Fed helps the states that have these people who are helping state with people who are helping people. If you have a better solution the boys in DC would love to hear them. :up:
As for the assault vehicle....no one said these are for Fed use only.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 01:52 PM
The armored vehicle conversation is useless. I have found well over 10 "news" cites such as AR15, M14, Teaparty and Infowars concerning the matter. I see a pattern alright.
geetrue
03-06-13, 02:35 PM
On a happy note: DHS was ten (10) years old March 1st :yeah:
Ok August, the great state of Massachusetts needs your tax dollars to raise enough MRE/water/blankets/tarps/generators/forklifts/trailers/tractors/John Deere gators/4-wheel drive vehicles to cover everyone in the state. It will be an additional $1000.00 per household per year.
That's fine. If the citizens of the great state of Massachusetts weren't paying 30% or more of their earnings to the federal government maybe we could easily afford it. You feds like to take our money then hand a little of it back with all kinds of strings attached. I say keep our money here where it belongs.
As for the assault vehicle....no one said these are for Fed use only.
You keep saying that but it sure looks like a police vehicle to me.
http://astheworldcrumbles.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/homeland-security-swat-truck.jpg
The armored vehicle conversation is useless. I have found well over 10 "news" cites such as AR15, M14, Teaparty and Infowars concerning the matter. I see a pattern alright.
I see a far more extensive pattern of government types trying to stifle conversation by vilifying the opposition. :yep:
Tribesman
03-06-13, 02:45 PM
Then New Yorks emergency management plans are woefully insufficient for it's population. The state is failing in it's basic duty. The feds would be far better off just making sure that the states plans are up to snuff than it is doing their job for them
Unbelievable.
The problem with a states disaster response and the states emergency supplies is that when the disaster hits that state it hits that agency and those supplies.
Common sense shows the state level approach you advocate makes no sense.
@Warhawk
The armored vehicle conversation is useless. I have found well over 10 "news" cites such as AR15, M14, Teaparty and Infowars concerning the matter. I see a pattern alright.
Are you saying its crazy conspiracy rants along the lines of the boy scouts secret army of Obamas nazi dentists:03:
Furthermore, have the electrical company purchase more trucks and crews so other companies from other states do not have to come to MA to assist with outages. Bear in mind to cover costs your gas/electric bill will have a nice increase. We after all can not be woefully insufficient in repair crews.
And BTW the Federal government does not dispatch electrical crews. Last I checked that was a private company. Of course it wouldn't be the first time the feds claimed credit for something they have nothing to do with.
Tribesman
03-06-13, 03:05 PM
I think august is upset that the Kennedy left his state so the evil feds could house the electrical crews onboard in her in NY.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 03:44 PM
Tribesman
The problem with a states disaster response and the states emergency supplies is that when the disaster hits that state it hits that agency and those supplies.
You nailed it sir. Lock, stock and barrel. When we stage for FEMA is it just outside the area that will be affected. Once said storm passed it is safe to go in with supplies and driver intact.
August
And BTW the Federal government does not dispatch electrical crews. Last I checked that was a private company. Of course it wouldn't be the first time the feds claimed credit for something they have nothing to do with.
I did not state the Fed sends repair crews. I stated people helping people. States helping states. Fed helping all. Last I checked, which is monthly when I see my utility bill, these are private companies.
August
I did not state the Fed sends repair crews. I stated people helping people. States helping states. Fed helping all. Last I checked, which is monthly when I see my utility bill, these are private companies.
So since we're discussing what the Federal government provides to the states what does this have to do with it?
Furthermore, have the electrical company purchase more trucks and crews so other companies from other states do not have to come to MA to assist with outages
Is it just piling on to make your point seem more valid?
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 04:03 PM
Is it just piling on to make your point seem more valid?
The point is, this is not cut and dry. There are many facets to the conglomerate known as the DHS. Each work independently but work together for a common goal.
There are enough whistle blowers and watchdogs on the Fed they can not fart without someone or media entity making a stink about it.
The point is, this is not cut and dry. There are many facets to the conglomerate known as the DHS. Each work independently but work together for a common goal.
But last I checked utility companies weren't part of your federal conglomerate so I don't see the reason for their inclusion.
There are enough whistle blowers and watchdogs on the Fed they can not fart without someone or media entity making a stink about it.And apparently not without someone in government trying to dismiss that stink. What you say may be true, now, but that still doesn't justify Federal law enforcement obtaining armored vehicles.
Stick to providing blankets and bottled water and there won't be a stink.
AVGWarhawk
03-06-13, 04:32 PM
But last I checked utility companies weren't part of your federal conglomerate so I don't see the reason for their inclusion.
And apparently not without someone in government trying to dismiss that stink. What you say may be true, now, but that still doesn't justify Federal law enforcement obtaining armored vehicles.
Stick to providing blankets and bottled water and there won't be a stink.
The inclusion of the electrical crews is as stated, people helping people. States helping states. You have seen many times of this activity after a storm. It is an example of the system that for some feel is being brought down by a purchase of armor vehicles and such.
There are a lot of things the Fed does that is not justifiable. Such as your paying for universal healthcare. Does it make it right then to purchase these vehicles because the Fed does a lot of unjustifiable things? Certainly not. Has anyone asked what these will be used for? Border protection? Not that I can find.
FEMA sticks to blankest and bottled water. Plus 4 wheel driver vehicles, front end loaders. John Deere gators and a plethora of other vehicles. But, the article says the DHS purchased these. Not FEMA. Again, the DHS is all agencies. These could go to ICE and other agencies that have a need.
TLAM Strike
03-06-13, 05:06 PM
Hmmm what part of DHS could need armored vehicles... :hmmm:
... oh... what about the division that has been operating them since the 40's; the US Secret Service?
The USSS is in charge of protecting not just POTUS and the VP but other heads of state on visits to the US and in some instances foreign embassies. The USSS also has several tactical response teams that might need a MRAP type vehicle to complete their mission.
Has anyone asked what these will be used for? Border protection? Not that I can find.
Then you didn't read the opening paragraph of the Business Insider article I linked to in the OP.
The Department of Homeland Security is using 16 military-style, mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles for use during "high-risk warrants," according to an official spokesman.
That's "High risk warrants", not border security, not delivering water bottles or blankets. These are combat vehicles and that's apparently what they are going to be used for unless you have some information to the contrary.
I keep hearing that they are getting over a thousand units,, any truth in that ???
I keep hearing that they are getting over a thousand units,, any truth in that ???
Think you're mixing this with the 1000+ Dolphins taught to walk on land and take away your guns in the midst of night they ordered. :hmmm:
Or was that the ants with microchips they plant in you during the night, always mix the two. :hmm2:
Tribesman
03-06-13, 06:33 PM
You nailed it sir. Lock, stock and barrel.
Well it isn't rocket science, that woukld be another evil government agency:03:
The whole subject is easily dealt with.
But the problem is that when faced with simple answers they don't like because they already have the conspiracy fixed in their head they resort to another "but why?", which is also easily answered only to be followed with another "but why?", answer that one and you get another "but why?". Then it comes full circle and goes back to the first"but why?" as they cannot move from their already fixed view.
Look at the latest.
That's "High risk warrants", not border security, not delivering water bottles or blankets. These are combat vehicles and that's apparently what they are going to be used for unless you have some information to the contrary.
High risk warrants that are border security.
Armed gangs involved in human trafficing across the border.
Simple isn't it.
Armed gangs involved in international drug smuggling.
Hey thats even better, plus as its the evil DHS at issue it leads to "why oh why does the coast guard have warships?"
So is that damn evil sneaky DHS secretly buying warships to oppress the people
or is it border security and combatting drug smugglers at sea. For good measure you can also throw in disaster relief on that one too .
I keep hearing that they are getting over a thousand units,, any truth in that ???
Nope.
Think you're mixing this with the 1000+ Dolphins taught to walk on land and take away your guns in the midst of night they ordered. :hmmm:
Or was that the ants with microchips they plant in you during the night, always mix the two. :hmm2:
happened in Simpsons:haha:
Apparently the ACLU sees this as a problem too:
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has launched a nationwide campaign to assess police militarization in the United States. Starting Wednesday, ACLU affiliates in 23 states are sending open records requests to hundreds of state and local police agencies requesting information about their SWAT teams, such as how often and for what reasons they're deployed, what types of weapons they use, how often citizens are injured during SWAT raids, and how they're funded. More affiliates may join the effort in the coming weeks. Additionally, the affiliates will ask for information about drones, GPS tracking devices, how much military equipment the police agencies have obtained through programs run through the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, and how often and for what purpose state National Guards are participating in enforcement of drug laws.
"We've known for a while now that American neighborhoods are increasingly being policed by cops armed with the weapons and tactics of war," said Kara Dansky, senior counsel at the ACLU's Center for Justice, which is coordinating the investigation. "The aim of this investigation is to find out just how pervasive this is, and to what extent federal funding is incentivizing this trend."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/aclu-police-militarization-swat_n_2813334.html
AVGWarhawk
03-07-13, 05:57 AM
ACLU is just one of the watch dogs. :up:
ACLU is just one of the watch dogs. :up:
Everybody is a watch dog, or at least should be. The Federal government is like a powerful and unpredictable beast. It must be kept on a very short leash at all times.
AVGWarhawk
03-07-13, 09:32 AM
Everybody is a watch dog, or at least should be. The Federal government is like a powerful and unpredictable beast. It must be kept on a very short leash at all times.
I agree August and understand the concern when the Fed kind of starts going out of it's realm, such as, armored vehicles. You are one of thousands that are vigilant and question. ACLU, NAACP, NRA, NLRB, etc. watch and question what any one or body of people are doing.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.