Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well get one!

Prime Minister's Question Time is one of the highlights of the parliamentary week on radio and TV.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Well get one!

Prime Minister's Question Time is one of the highlights of the parliamentary week on radio and TV.

Is that where the Prime Minister gets up there and they yell at each other? Thats so cool.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Aren't the National Guard basically the milita of the various states?

Not really, they are more like the army of that particular state.


We have the Federal Army, what is called the Army, Navy, Marines, etc...

Then we have the State Armies. We call them the National Guard. They evolved out of what was once a true militia, but they are now more like a professional army who only works part time.

 Frazzled wrote:
Is that where the Prime Minister gets up there and they yell at each other? Thats so cool.

Yup, pretty much that

Yes. They are not a national force but a local one, unless deployed under federal command.

Yeah, its just there is a difference between an Army and a Militia. The National Guard don't really fit the definition of a militia. That definition is best fit by everyone thats signed up for the Selective Service(IE: the Draft)

 Kilkrazy wrote:
In the UK you would write to your MP who would ask a question in Parliament. The government would be compelled to answer.

Surely there is a system like that in the US.

Have you not seen the petitions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
meh... I think the DHS just had $$$ left over in their budget... so, they used it on the MARP.

But... with the recent purchases to all that ammo... I wouldn't get too comfortable Canada!

 Frazzled wrote:
Indeed, its a waste. It also makes the militia types freak out. Frankly although I'm not a miltiia type, it makes me freak out a little as well. Thats whats the state guard units are for and this reaks of black helicopter/INSERT YOURFAVORITEDICTATORSHIP HERE

I know for a fact that you've advocated putting Abrams on the US/Mexico border, so why you're freaked out by this is mystifying.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Why do you write to your congressman and get him to ask a question about why the DHS needs these vehicles?

er...what?

Should probably have been "Why don't you write"

And we have something, but congressional types aren't required to answer you (though the few times I have, the congressman that I wrote happened to respond), but there are those who will either respond personally, or at least their office will.

the State Defense Forces are closer to a militia then the NG.

The who??

 whembly wrote:
The who??

My guess is that very few states have them (like Texas) as I also haven't heard of them.

Ok, can someone explain this "Sequester" to me?

Does any body have a not crazy link for the story? Because Fraz's link in his OP is reading a lot like crazy weird uncle email spam. Especially when it links to the already debunked zombie myth of the DHS buying all those bullets (the contract is for five years, and represents a supply equal to current usage).

Anyhow, I'm really loving Fraz's little bit of political nonsense where the sequester is somehow the answer to government spending. I mean, I get that you love team Red and everything, but for feth's sake, the actually reality of the situation matters.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Call me crazy, but I always thought that it was the Department of DEFENSE's job to, you know... .defend the US?

I've always hated DHS, and it's people... Honestly, the "port" security that is currently manned by DHS should be either provided by local/state police agencies, National Guard, or Active Military people, it is our job afterall....

Okay, you're crazy. National border control needs a national agency connected to national intelligence gathering operations.

You gonna sit there and claim that guys in ports checking half of 1% or whatever it is of shipping containers is the effective control on importation? It's the surveillance and informant networks (all those 'anonymous tip-offs') that provide effective border control. And that needs a national agency.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CptJake wrote:
As for the gov, again, you are building strawmen. To use a federal agency and mobilize their gear is going to take longer and more coordination than a state agency using their gear in almost every case.

Absolute poppycock. The ease and efficiency with which resources can be rolled out depends entirely on how those resources are stored, and the protocols needed to deploy them. That is to say, if a resource needs the approval of only the local controller, and the resources are directly on hand, then it will be quicker to deploy than resources needing approval from higher up the chain of command, and the transport of resources from state or national level storage, no matter whether it is nominally a state of federal asset.

Trying to invent some kind of 'state governemt is more efficient' for a specific case like this is just lazy thinking.

I'm sure that there can be some justification for the need of an MRAP type vehicle, at some of our airports, or other roles that DHS fulfills. More then 2,000 though, at a cost of about 1 billion dollars?

Why not just repurpose some of the MRAPS that came back from Iraq, and soon to be Afghanistan, for this? The DoD is no stranger to "selling" surplus materials.

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sure that there can be some justification for the need of an MRAP type vehicle, at some of our airports, or other roles that DHS fulfills. More then 2,000 though, at a cost of about 1 billion dollars?

Yeah, I can't see a need for that many. DHS includes Customs and Border Patrol, so I could see some being stationed at the various entry points along the US/Mexico border. Those cartels don't play nice down there: they already have their own armored vehicles.

That's what they did I thought?

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 whembly wrote:
The who??

My guess is that very few states have them (like Texas) as I also haven't heard of them.

Alaska*, Alabama, California*, Conneticut, Washington DC*, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois*, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusets, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey*, New Mexico, New York*, Ohio*, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas*, Vermont, Virginia*, and Washington State all have state guard/defense forces on duty.

*designates naval forces under militia control

Seriously, does anyone have a non-crazy link for this story? Is it going to be like that OMG DHS buying one billion bullets thing again?

 sebster wrote:
Seriously, does anyone have a non-crazy link for this story? Is it going to be like that OMG DHS buying one billion bullets thing again?

I got you mate.

http://killerapps.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/04/yes_dhs_really_does_have_mraps

It even has a video!




This particular MRAP is attached to a Special Response Team with "Operators" who apparently use it to serve warrants.... hmmm. It's also worth noting that the vehicle displays "ICE" (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) markings along with it's DHS and SRT identifiers. Honestly the southern border might eventually need a small supply of vehicles like these, as border violence continues to escalate.

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sure that there can be some justification for the need of an MRAP type vehicle, at some of our airports, or other roles that DHS fulfills. More then 2,000 though, at a cost of about 1 billion dollars?

Why not just repurpose some of the MRAPS that came back from Iraq, and soon to be Afghanistan, for this? The DoD is no stranger to "selling" surplus materials.

Evidently the figure of 2717 vehicles does not necessarily reflect the number in use by DHS.

From what I can tell in January 2011 Navistar Defense was awarded a contract by U.S. Marine Corps System Command to upgrade 2,717 MRAPs. The video in Frazzled's link was posted in May 2012, somehow this is news worthy of March 2013.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

This particular MRAP is attached to a Special Response Team with "Operators" who apparently use it to serve warrants.... hmmm. It's also worth noting that the vehicle displays "ICE" (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) markings along with it's DHS and SRT identifiers. Honestly the southern border might eventually need a small supply of vehicles like these, as border violence continues to escalate.

Is there any occupation left that even remotely involves the use of firearms that hasn't appropriated the "operator" terminology?

 Seaward wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

This particular MRAP is attached to a Special Response Team with "Operators" who apparently use it to serve warrants.... hmmm. It's also worth noting that the vehicle displays "ICE" (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) markings along with it's DHS and SRT identifiers. Honestly the southern border might eventually need a small supply of vehicles like these, as border violence continues to escalate.

Is there any occupation left that even remotely involves the use of firearms that hasn't appropriated the "operator" terminology?

I'm a gunsmith, the most tacticool we get is "Armorers" and those guys usually catch gak because they tend to be significantly less trained then an actual gunsmith. If I do meet an "operator gunsmith" I'll be sure to get a picture so everyone can join me in laughing.

 dogma wrote:
Evidently the figure of 2717 vehicles does not necessarily reflect the number in use by DHS.

From what I can tell in January 2011 Navistar Defense was awarded a contract by U.S. Marine Corps System Command to upgrade 2,717 MRAPs. The video in Frazzled's link was posted in May 2012, somehow this is news worthy of March 2013.

Ah right, there we go. Nothing to see here people. Just the same grape vine nonsense as the omg DHS buys a billion bullets, government takeover is coming!

So when people say that DHS is not a law enforcement agency, are they saying that:

-Customs and Border Protection
-Imigration and Customs Enforcement
-United States Secret Service
-US Coast Guard

These are not law enfocement agencies?

(I left out the TSA on purpose )

 sebster wrote:


[

CptJake wrote:
As for the gov, again, you are building strawmen. To use a federal agency and mobilize their gear is going to take longer and more coordination than a state agency using their gear in almost every case.

Absolute poppycock. The ease and efficiency with which resources can be rolled out depends entirely on how those resources are stored, and the protocols needed to deploy them. That is to say, if a resource needs the approval of only the local controller, and the resources are directly on hand, then it will be quicker to deploy than resources needing approval from higher up the chain of command, and the transport of resources from state or national level storage, no matter whether it is nominally a state of federal asset.

Trying to invent some kind of 'state governemt is more efficient' for a specific case like this is just lazy thinking.

Absolutely NOT poppycock. For LE missions involving SWAT/SRT type forces the Feds rarely start with jurisdiction, and therefore to get them and their assets generally takes more time than the state/local LE that has jurisdiction and assets within that jurisdiction.

 Seaward wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

This particular MRAP is attached to a Special Response Team with "Operators" who apparently use it to serve warrants.... hmmm. It's also worth noting that the vehicle displays "ICE" (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) markings along with it's DHS and SRT identifiers. Honestly the southern border might eventually need a small supply of vehicles like these, as border violence continues to escalate.

Is there any occupation left that even remotely involves the use of firearms that hasn't appropriated the "operator" terminology?

My wiener dogs are squirrel aquisition and termination operators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dogma wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Indeed, its a waste. It also makes the militia types freak out. Frankly although I'm not a miltiia type, it makes me freak out a little as well. Thats whats the state guard units are for and this reaks of black helicopter/INSERT YOURFAVORITEDICTATORSHIP HERE

I know for a fact that you've advocated putting Abrams on the US/Mexico border, so why you're freaked out by this is mystifying.

Because thats the Army. Thats their job. Not the airport security rent a cops.

ICE shouldn't have them either. If we need armored vehicles on the border, we need they Army there, who's job is...protect the borders of the United States.

 d-usa wrote:
So when people say that DHS is not a law enforcement agency, are they saying that:

-Customs and Border Protection
-Imigration and Customs Enforcement
-United States Secret Service
-US Coast Guard

These are not law enfocement agencies?

(I left out the TSA on purpose )

I believe in my last post I said people were getting their panties twisted over the United States Secret Service*, the Coast Guard*, and the TSA. Immigration and Border Patrol could totally have need for these types of vehicles... Except maybe for customs... Granted when I went through customs after our cruise it was just a bunch of people you looked like slightly friendlier TSA agents making sure that I wasn't smuggling cocaine in my rectum or exoctic fruits. They weren't really clear on that one :-\.

* - Admittedly, I'm unsure of what the secret service does beyond protecting the President, other government leaders, and visiting world leaders, and I'm not sure what these vehicles need to be doing on boats.

These vehicles are a VERY poor choice for border patrol. They are expensive to maintain, slow, and their off road manueverability is crap.

They are a very poor choice for the secret service for a variety of reasons (to include the main one, the threat these vehicles are designed to counter, burried bombs, are not present in the areas the secret service should be taking VIPs into).

Coast Guard does not have a mission that requires these, nor should they.

TSA also does not have a mission that requires patrolling areas where burried bombs and mines are likely.

Lets be clear, an MRAP is designed to counter burried explosive charges that attack the underside of a vehicle. They are not very manueverable, they are very expensive to maintain, they are slow and heavy. They were designed for a very specific purpose and honestly there is not much use for them stateside.

This is an attempt to make some use of vehicles coming out of the war zones. Unfortunately those vehicles get beat to heck and require a lot of money to fix them up and refurbish them for stateside use. They are going to be nothing but a burden on the tax payers. I suspect many will find their way to local and state LE agencies and be a burden on their tax sources and really there is not enough of a requirement to justify the costs.

 Alfndrate wrote:

* - Admittedly, I'm unsure of what the secret service does beyond protecting the President, other government leaders, and visiting world leaders.

The protection gig is about half their job. The other half is basically policing our financial system. So there is a lot of police work with counterfitting and fraud going on.

Had a patient once who made quite a few threads against Obama to our police (even the VA has law enforcement functions) and they had to forward them to the Secret Service. I was actually quite surprised when we had agents in our hospital within 30 minutes. I learned that night that we have our own secret service office in Oklahoma City due to having a branch of the Kansas City Federal Reserve in OKC.