US Senator: Big Sis Buying Ammo To Dry Up Supply
Inhofe: “I believe it’s intentional”
May 6, 2013
A US Senator has stated on record that he believes the Department of Homeland Security is intentionally attempting to exhaust civilian supplies of ammunition by buying huge bulk amounts, as documented by Infowars for some months.
Appearing on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on WABC in New York, Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. said that the Obama administration was attempting to “dry up the market” and deprive gun owners of bullets.
“We have in this country the Second Amendment that preserves the right to keep and bear arms, and the president doesn’t believe in that.” Inhofe said.
“President Obama has been doing everything he could to stop the private ownership of guns in America,” the Senator added. “Yet he’s been voted down in a big way by a large majority, and so my feeling is that he’s doing this to buy up [ammunition] so honest, law-abiding citizens here in the United States, like my son, can’t even buy ammunition because government is purchasing so much.”
“We had someone testify the other day the DHS has the ‘right’ – this is a bureaucrat who said this – they have the ‘right’ to buy as much as they want, and they’re planning to buy 750 million rounds,” Inhofe said, referring to a House committee hearing last week, during which the DHS’s chief procurement officer denied that the agency was stockpiling ammunition, while simultaneously admitting that the huge open orders had been submitted.
Inhofe pointed out that the amount of ammunition on order “is more than three times the amount our soldiers are using for training to defend our nation.”
In addition, last week, The DHS released a market survey asking companies if they are able to provide 2 million rounds of ammunition within a short time period, increasing concerns that the federal agency is continuing its arms build up even further.
“I believe it’s intentional,” Inhofe said, describing the situation as “just another effort to restrict gun activity and ownership.”
“This has never happened in this country before. We’ve never had government trying to take that much control at the expense of law-abiding citizens. And we’re not going to let it happen.” Inhofe added.
Ammo shortages across the nation are now commonplace, with gun stores forced to resort to bullet rationing, and self production in an attempt to satisfy as many customers as they can, while some police departments are having to barter between themselves to meet demand.
Despite the official denials backed up by unquestioning media reports that the DHS is buying an abnormal amount of bullets, the Government Accountability Office announced last week that an investigation of the purchases is “just getting underway.”
Two weeks ago, Inhofe introduced legislation into the Senate that would limit such stockpiling of bullets by federal agencies.
The bill, known as the Ammunition Management for More Obtainability Act, or AMMO act for short, would stop short of limiting the Department of Defense on ammo purchases, but would prevent the DHS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from purchasing or storing more ammunition than those agencies retained on average between 2001 and 2009.
Speaking about the legislation, Inhofe noted:
“It’s designed to have the Government Accounting Office inventory not the Defense Department but all other departments that use weaponry,” Inhofe said, “as to what they’re doing in terms of the amount of ammunition they have bought to dry up the market for honest, law-abiding citizens.”
Listen to the full interview below:
On 24 April in the town where I live, a wonderful town that I love, a woman was shot to death in front of her four-year-old son, Joshua. According to authorities, she was a college student.
A young woman, obviously invested in education, undoubtedly with dreams of a good life for herself and her child, struck down. It’s a sad story, a tragedy worthy of deep sorrow and serious reflection about gun violence and gun policy, especially when added to the fact that it was the fourth fatal shooting in my town in a week. Despite the obvious potential of such a story to poke at the hearts and minds of anyone who hears about it, most people won’t hear about it. It won’t get in the 24-hour news cycle. And it certainly will not spark a national debate about gun control. Why? Because the woman who was killed, Donitra Henderson, was a black woman and she died on a street corner in Oakland, a predominantly black and Latino town, in front of her black child.
Gun violence affects black and Latino people in poor, inner-city neighborhoods on a regular basis. As The Washington Post reported, black people are 10 times more likely to be killed by a gun crime, and yet our deaths by gun are much less likely to result in national conversations in which liberals and conservatives duke it out over the second amendment. We become statistics, just one more added to the number of gun deaths in the US in a particular year, and that’s all.
As I wrote in my recent blog post, “Hey, White liberals: A Word On the Boston Bombings, the Suffering of White children, and the Erosion of Empathy,” if you’re not white, your tragic death doesn’t feel quite as tragic to the American media or the collective American conscience, which are inextricably linked. It does not inspire the kind of national outrage and grief that white deaths, and especially middle-class and affluent white deaths, inspire.
There is a certain level of indifference in this country to the deaths of people of color. But there is also a double standard in the narrative around gun violence, depending on where it takes place and who is affected by it. When it happens to wealthy white folks in the suburbs, it’s a tragedy visited upon those who didn’t deserve it. When it happens to black and Latino people in a city, it’s our own fault.
Take, for example, President Obama’s speech in Chicago about gun violence where he talked about policy change, but also focused a lot on the structure of the black family, saying:
“There’s no more important ingredient for success, nothing that would be more important for us reducing violence than strong, stable families – which means we should do more to promote marriage and encourage fatherhood.”
Compare that to speeches he made following the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, a predominantly white area, where a gunman murdered 26 people, including 20 children. The president never connected the violence there with the structure of anybody’s family or with the failure of any white parents. Even though the shooter, Adam Lanza, was raised by a single mother. Instead, he promised the people of Newtown that lawmakers would stand beside them and create policy to protect them. Those are two very different messages.
One reason this double standard is so easy to apply is that the question of why gun violence happens so much in inner cities is brushed over or ignored. There are many factors: the effects of racism on individuals and communities, failed education systems, high unemployment, etc. These are rarely discussed in connection to gun violence on a national level.
Without that connection, and thus with no greater social ills to help explain it, it’s seen simply as the fault of the people who live in those places, as if they have some inherent defect in their families and their communities. And because it’s our fault and not, as in the case of violence against middle-class white people, a national tragedy, it does not warrant a national conversation.
This double standard leads to the further devaluing of black and Latino lives. It also contributes to the sporadic nature of the national gun control conversation itself. Because gun control is only talked about on a national level when multiple murders happen in affluent white places, it’s talked about a few times a year at most.
If the conversation were shifted to include the tragedies of people in the inner city, if our lives were valued enough by the American media and the collective US conscience to warrant that conversation, it would be an ongoing debate. Maybe then it would at least have a chance at leading to some actual change. Which would be great. Especially for those of us who are most often affected by it.
Gun Control - Watch What Happens When Guns Are Banned.
The United States Senate has rejected a gun control law that would have expanded background checks.
Illegal Police Search and Seizure
Archie Bunker on Gun Control
April 1, 2013
Defense Distributed co-founder Cody Wilson.
According to a notice posted on the Defense Distributed website, Homeland Security Investigations and the Justice Department have taken the site down.
“This domain name associated with the website …
March 21, 2013
Nearly a year before signing the nation’s most stringent gun control measure into law, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo launched a hotline that allows state residents to report illegal gun owners in exchange for a $500 reward.
The measure is part of a four-pronged approach established by the governor’s office to reduce gun violence in urban communities, according to CBS6Albany.com.
New Yorkers can call the “Gun Tip Line” if they believe someone they know has an illegal gun. Hotline calls are answered by state police and tips are referred to local law enforcement, the station reported.
“This initiative seeks to turn neighbor against neighbor and use their own tax dollars to pay for the $500 reward,” Republican Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin told the station.
Warning to American gun owners from Canadian news anchor.