What companies are selling ammo to the DHS?

[uberpeck]

We should petition to the companies not to sell to the government. Who are they?!

 

[hornadylnl]

In a business culture that sees government contracts as a good thing, good luck with that.

 

[KLB]

You think they would stop selling to their biggest customer?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Everyone is selling to Uncle Sam.

IF this is a concern, IF (see earlier threads), then the petition that needs to be delivered is to Congress.

 

[pudly]

Why would any business respond positively to that? What will you do, boycott their ammo? You have no leverage and they can safely ignore you. When an item is in shortage, the buyer does not have much power and all you will accomplish is to leave that ammo on the shelf, so it can be snapped up 1 minute later by the next buyer in line.

 

[uberpeck]

Was the word boycott in the OP? I don't see it; making assumptions doesn't bolster your argument. Rather than boycotting, we as the people, could buy the ammo they are selling to the government. Make it a bidding war. 2billion rounds that the guv is buying divided by the 300million gun owners equals 6.6 boxes per person. That's doable

 

[pudly]

You are correct. You didn't say boycott. You only want to try to get companies to not sell to their largest and most reliable customer. Companies will almost always take the large, continuous, reliable orders over the uncertainty of one-off customers. That is why they offer discounts for large and repeat customers. You still aren't offering them anything that they would consider a positive to change their behavior and you have no leverage for negative action (boycotts or otherwise).

 

[uberpeck]

I would argue that gun owners are pretty reliable. And it's not the total guv I'm talking about (see thread title)- just the DHS buying hollow points for "training purposes."

 

[HoughMade]

......the return of "the government is buying billions of rounds" threads. ​Oh goody.

 

[pudly]

Gun owners aren't reliable at all. How many thousand rounds worth of orders have you or anyone you know put in for continuous delivery over the next several years? Many of us will gladly jump from one brand to another to save a dollar/box. A business wants to be able to predict how much they can sell so that they can decide how best to invest for the future. Recently, they've had to struggle to decide if they really can trust the expanded public demand enough to build new plants/lines or just increase the number of shifts on existing lines. For the most part, they have decided to do the latter.

It is pretty much guaranteed that gun owners will rush in and out of the market based on the latest unpredictable actions of our government. There is a huge back order log right now, but will it be there 5 years from now with the next administration? Will there even be a public market for ammo in 5 years? Businesses work in a very uncertain environment, but they will take all the certainty that they can get.

Trying to get them to stop selling to DHS will not work for multiple reasons that I've listed before, but also because they would very likely be threatened with loss of military and other govt-driven sales. You still haven't listed a single item that would make them listen to you. A petition that can't be followed up by action does absolutely nothing.

To address your item about using hollow points for "training purposes". Govt agencies have been using hollow points for training for many years; long before this administration. Many disagree with that policy mostly on cost grounds, but there is a certain logic to it. You should ideally practice with what you carry. Most of us don't do it very much only for cost reasons. We would prefer that the govt practice more with round nose as we do to save money, but changing that would involve petitions to govt, not ammo companies.

Edit: Just occurred to me. You want to petition companies to break their contracts with the govt? That would be asking them to harm themselves financially even if they sold the same volume to the public.

 

[HoughMade]

The Great DHS Ammunition Stockpile Myth

Breitbart....hardly an apologist for the administration.

 

[uberpeck]

This is good information.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I wonder how badly we'd have been trounced in WWII if today's entitled whiners had been running the show back when essentially the entire civilian manufacturing base was taken over for the war effort. We've been at war for over 10 years. We've expanded the Border Patrol (who, along with the Coast Guard fall under the dreaded DHS). Yet there was no ammo shortage until Newtown. You can still go buy a new Ford. You can still go buy a rifle. You can go to the grocery without a ration book. Oh the weeping and gnashing of teeth we'd see here if we actually had to do that again today. The cry of socialism would be deafening. After a decade of war, the vast majority of the population isn't affected in any way, and yet we complain more stridently than our parents (or grandparents, depending on age, I suppose) ever did.

So of course let's boycott the manufacturers of ammunition based on misinformation and our own sense of entitlement. How dare they sell ammunition to the Border Patrol, etc?

 

[HoughMade]

THEY did not cause the ammo shortage. WE did.

 

[pudly]

Here is a partial explanation for the ammo shortage:

[video=youtube_share;TseM5QkijJA]http://youtu.be/TseM5QkijJA[/video]

 

[Trooper]

We know of several shell companies that are buying in large quantities then warehousing. In many cases it is these shell companies that received the contracts. Many are owned by rich democrats who had advanced knowledge of what the administration was planning thus bought ammo and weapons for the last two years. All they do is a holding company function with warehousing. They buy low then sell at an inflated price.

 

[HoughMade]

"We know"?

 

[Trooper]

"We know"?

Adding 30 million new gun owners is a large part of the problem. It has just made the market very large.

But in tracking back the government orders, who got the contracts, there have been a few holding/shell companies that seem to have gotten the contracts. And the principles of those companies are all very rich democrats. Insider information, buying low then selling at inflated prices. Very close to being illegal.

 

[HoughMade]

I would like to read more about this.

 

[jbombelli]

I wonder how badly we'd have been trounced in WWII if today's entitled whiners had been running the show back when essentially the entire civilian manufacturing base was taken over for the war effort. We've been at war for over 10 years. We've expanded the Border Patrol (who, along with the Coast Guard fall under the dreaded DHS). Yet there was no ammo shortage until Newtown. You can still go buy a new Ford. You can still go buy a rifle. You can go to the grocery without a ration book. Oh the weeping and gnashing of teeth we'd see here if we actually had to do that again today. The cry of socialism would be deafening. After a decade of war, the vast majority of the population isn't affected in any way, and yet we complain more stridently than our parents (or grandparents, depending on age, I suppose) ever did.

So of course let's boycott the manufacturers of ammunition based on misinformation and our own sense of entitlement. How dare they sell ammunition to the Border Patrol, etc?

We as a populace no longer sacrifice to go to war. We used to. Now we just borrow from everyone else to pay for it instead of tightening our belts and paying for it ourselves.

We know of several shell companies that are buying in large quantities then warehousing. In many cases it is these shell companies that received the contracts. Many are owned by rich democrats who had advanced knowledge of what the administration was planning thus bought ammo and weapons for the last two years. All they do is a holding company function with warehousing. They buy low then sell at an inflated price.

Got any specific, concrete examples with links to reputable sources to support this?

Adding 30 million new gun owners is a large part of the problem. It has just made the market very large.

I'll go along with that.

But in tracking back the government orders, who got the contracts, there have been a few holding/shell companies that seem to have gotten the contracts. And the principles of those companies are all very rich democrats. Insider information, buying low then selling at inflated prices. Very close to being illegal.

Got any specific, concrete examples with links to reputable sources to support this?