1919 A4 Forums banner

Homeland Security

6484 Views 31 Replies 10 Participants Last post by  FN74
Yesterday, a fellow gun nut at work was telling me he heard that the Department of Homeland Security has been buying up all the 5.56 it could get its hands on. Has anyone here heard anything on this? :confused:
1 - 7 of 32 Posts
Not true. DOD is buying up most of it for use overseas - training etc. in iraq and afghanistan.

Of course we do buy the most! But Uncle Sugar in general has a high demand

I wont post all the press releases, these gguys have BILLIONS in contracts, and some of the biggest went to DHS, given the size of DHS that is not a shocker. They are also our main civilian supplier!


ATK is the largest, Lake City was at max capacity just from the Army two years ago.

Even IMI has to help out:

Israeli company to help make up U.S. ammunition shortage

Jun. 01 - Israel Military Industries (IMI) will help the U.S. Army overcome its ammunition shortage, caused by fighting protracted wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Ha'aretz reported. The New York Times quotes a US Army spokesman as saying that the US armed services needed 300 million to 500 million rounds this year alone, beyond the 1.2 billion already being produced. All production currently comes from a factory in Lake City, Mo., that is owned by the Army and managed by Alliant Techsystems. In the meantime, the Army has already arranged for two contractors - Winchester, a division of the Olin Corporation and the state-owned IMI - to provide an additional supply this year.



If your job requires that you pack heat for Uncle Sugar and are amung civilians, you gotta be qualified. Zappin a civie in the hott place is one thing, but goin loud in suburbia is bad press:p
Where does is say DHS is buying it up? I don't see it there...

I know DOD is buying is up, hell half of the training ammo we received in Iraq was new contract stuff - some of it was WOLF production in NATO specs.
you break the law in front of the coast guard, you go to jail,sounds like a cop to me ,glad they are out there ,we need more of them , I would not argue with them if I were you, they carry big guns and they know how to use them
Not necessarily. You spill oil even on purpose you get a fine. Coast Guard's authority is more civil/administrative law than criminal law. It is akin to a MP arresting someone on post. If they detain a civilian, they have to call the Local PD to press charges or call in a Special Agent. Our resident "I've done everything secret squirrel" alamosaddles has no clue what he's talking about. In fact, LEO is defined under the 6(c) section of retirement. I'll find the code for you if you'd like.
I agree thats why I said they can call the one with the jurisdiction,just like any officer out of their own territory
Yes, but Coast Guardsmen not under arms have no authority. You have to be under arms and Performing the mission for that authority to carry, and then they can only detain for the agents. Security Guards in a mall can do the same thing, does that make them LE?

Civilians can detain/arrest someone for a felony in their presence, does that make them LE?


Some of these articles specify their dilemma:



CGIS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_Guard_Investigative_Service
(Not all Coast Guardsmen are Special Agents...lol)

Coast Guard is charged with some LE Authority, that does not make all Coasties "Law Enforcement Officers" contrary to the belief by some. They do not get issued credentials with arrest authority 24 hours a day. They do not bear arms outside of on duty and in uniform and have no provision to bear arms off duty. They are not covered by the Law Enforcement Retirement. They are no better off than a MP or SP doing their job on duty. Off duty, they are civilians.

Hope this clears the air. If you still have doubt go over to www.military.com and read the USCG forums - there is a section on LE and feel free to ask questions. The 1000 or so coasties online over there will let you know what I say is true.
See less See more
Coast Guard is Seeking Broader Authority to Make Arrests on Land

Enforcement Powers Remain Murky as Port Security Duties Add to Service’s Mission

Sea Power Correspondent

In August 2002, the U.S. Marshal Service deputized 79 Coast Guardsmen, giving them and their immediate subordinates the authority to make arrests on shore. That trial program was an attempt to boost the service’s legitimacy on land as a U.S. law enforcement agency.

It is also indicative of a fundamental change under way in the Coast Guard. The service is seeking broader law enforcement authority as a means to carry out its mission of protecting the nation’s ports.

Federal statute gives Coast Guardsmen the authority to make arrests on the high seas and in U.S. jurisdictional waters, but unless the Coast Guard is in “hot pursuit” — chasing a suspected criminal from the water onto land — arrest authority on terra firma is less clear. With passage of the 2002 Maritime Transportation Security Act, the Coast Guard was charged with overseeing security at the nation’s ports and harbors. Yet without specific land arrest authority, service members said they were not certain their enforcement operations in and around shore would hold up in court.

“We saw a gap in a clear authority for us to conduct law enforcement on shore. There’s absolutely no question that when we are on the water, we have the authority, and we might have the authority onshore as well,” but the Coast Guard wants to clear up some lingering uncertainties about its authority on land, said Louis Orsini, a law enforcement specialist at Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

The Coast Guard’s legal authority in U.S. territorial waters is delineated in U.S. Code. But its authority on land and the high seas is a matter of international law, based on treaties and past cases. Under international law, the service has legal authority when actively engaged in a law enforcement mission, for example, a “hot pursuit.”

The trial program was viewed as a success, and the U.S. Marshal Service is now deputizing up to 1,000 members. These individuals can carry firearms, make arrests and conduct search-and-seizure operations on land. The deputizing effort is just one of many changes the Coast Guard is making to its law enforcement mission. To meet post-Sept. 11, 2001, security demands the Coast Guard is examining its current policies and training requirements and seeks to expand its law enforcement capabilities.

Among the changes, the Coast Guard plans to:

¨ Adjust training requirements so personnel can earn law enforcement qualifications and specialize in law enforcement;

¨ Examine the current ratings system and determine whether the service needs a law enforcement-specific rating;

¨ Expand law enforcement training capability and co-locate it with a portion of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Charleston, S.C.;

¨ Ask Congress for legislation that gives the service land-based law enforcement authority without the need to go through the U.S. Marshal Service.

The Coast Guard also is reorganizing personnel, putting highly trained security, safety and law enforcement teams near critical U.S. ports, and continuing a program to place maritime safety officers on high-interest vessels when they enter or leave U.S. ports.

“We did some specialization. The Marine Safety and Security Teams that are out there doing specifically port security and marine safety security missions free up the larger assets, the more resource-intensive ones, to be able to go offshore and do traditional law enforcement,” said Capt. Kevin Quigley, chief of the Office of Defense Operations at Coast Guard headquarters in Washington, D.C.

The Coast Guard historically has enforced U.S. maritime law, dating to the late 1700s when the Revenue Cutter Service enforced tariff and trade rules. As the only federal military service to reside outside the Defense Department, it is not restricted to conduct law enforcement operations by the Posse Comitatus Act, which expressly prohibits the Army and Air Force from engaging directly in law enforcement. (The Navy and Marine Corps comply with Posse Comitatus by Defense Department directive).

This duality, as a military service and a law enforcement force, gives the Coast Guard a unique role in homeland security.

“We have our feet planted in both camps and, depending on the needs of the nation, we can adjust,” Quigley said. “The greatest need following Sept. 11 was the dual authority to operate as a military service and law enforcement agency. It made us more visible than we had been in the past.”

The Coast Guard’s maritime law enforcement missions include counterdrug and migrant interdiction operations, fisheries enforcement and port security. Before Sept. 11, roughly 1 percent of the service’s law enforcement budget went to port security. Immediately following the attacks, that allocation of assets spiked to 90 percent; it has slowly fallen to about 25 percent of overall law enforcement resources.

To meet demand, the service has expanded its law enforcement budget, created new law enforcement teams for domestic port security operations, added a security boarding and positive control program to monitor, board and oversee high-interest vessels in the United States, and expanded the number of deployable reserve port security units from six to eight.

The Coast Guard also is working more closely with its fellow Homeland Security agencies, federal law enforcement, intelligence, and state, local and private entities to improve security coverage along the nation’s 95,000 miles of shoreline.

“The proper approach is an all-hands effort, and the law enforcement community is not doing this alone. The [search-and-rescue] folks are out there, the regulatory side of the house is out there. Across the spectrum, there is local and state law enforcement. A lot of what we do is just knowing what is out there every day. We couldn’t do it without interagency cooperation,” said retired Coast Guard Capt. Tony Regalbuto, of the service’s Policy and Planning Port Security Directorate.

Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thomas H. Collins announced Dec. 31, 2003, that the service would create a law enforcement qualifications program to take training to a higher level. Coast Guardsmen earning the specialized qualifications title will serve as unit law enforcement experts, coordinating unit level training and assisting commanding officers in maintaining unit level readiness in law enforcement.

“We must improve law enforcement proficiency and provide for continuity of assignments for law enforcement professionals,” Collins said in a Coast Guard-wide message.

Collins stopped short of creating a law enforcement (LE) rating — a proposal that has been studied for at least the past five years. But he left the door open for that possibility down the road. “An LE rating could negatively impact LE professionals rather than provide needed improvements,” Collins wrote. “It would be extremely difficult to implement at many small units with LE responsibilities where LE competencies are critical. It would require resources currently not available.”

The service also aims to improve its law enforcement training opportunities by consolidating it at a Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Academy, co-located with the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center branch in Charleston, S.C. The service is creating the academy from a school in Petaluma, Calif., and another in Yorktown, Va. The relocation will allow the service to expand the school and give Coast Guardsmen access to additional federal law enforcement training.

“We expect there will be a lot of synergy between us and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center,” said Dave Walts, in the Coast Guard Office of Training, Work Force Performance and Development.

The service also is pressing Congress to give it the legislative authority to make land arrests. During a January hearing before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security, Rear Adm. Larry Hereth implored Congress to give the service that capability. “Gaining this authority is a top legislative priority for the Coast Guard. … We would greatly appreciate the committee’s support in this matter,” he said.

Such authority would improve the nation’s maritime security, Coast Guard officials said. Even without it, however, the changes to the Coast Guard’s law enforcement programs have increased security greatly along the nation’s shores, they said.

“We are bringing a more robust security operation online that we’ve haven’t done before,” Quigley said.
See less See more
wolf is like the rest of the ammo companys ,they sale to the highest bidder ,u.s. is only on one side ,there is the side shooting back ,they need ammo to
Really, I did'nt know that... Were you in Iraq too? LOL. No, the "other side" is not "Buying up the ammo" - they are using up stockpiles that were there from 25 years ago.

The reason there is a shortage in the US is because of the training requirements here and abroad, as well as the war requirements.

DHS is not "Buying up all the ammo" - while they do buy a share of ammo, the majority of it is .40 caliber pistol ammo.

Border Patrol, USCG and some of the other agencies use a bit of .223, but that's about it. Not much use for .308 in DHS, even with the CG - they mostly have .223 and .50 cals to feed, as well as 25mm and up.

ICE has P90s and Steyr AUGs, although the AUGs are out the door in favor of the p90s.

P90s use 5,7mm ammo, not .223.

Rumors like this are how things get blown out of proportion.
See less See more
DUDES.............panzerfaust is right on this arguing thing...............this post is about 5.56 being used up NOT about the coast guard. Let it go.....

As far as this topic goes, thats an interesting theory, but I think it is just being used up by the military/LE and so there is none left for us guys.
That is correct. The DOD has a contract with WOLF and several other companies as well as has been buying up the surplus on the world market for the Iraqi Army, police etc. For training and combat use.
I trained Iraqi border troops this past summer and personnel and we used a ton of this ammo.
1 - 7 of 32 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.