DHS: Sport rifle (AR-15) “suitable for personal defense”

[Wehrwolfen]

Department of Homeland Security: Sport rifle (AR-15) “suitable for personal defense”​

by Steve McGoughon
January 15, 2013

The United States Department of Homeland Security has stated a rifle chambered in 5.56 NATO (compatible with .223) with a magazine capacity of 30 rounds is “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters…”



Well smack me up-side the head. First, a hat tip to Breitbart’s Awr Hawkins who pointed us to a posted General Services Administration (GSA) business opportunity solicitation posted and updated last summer. Basically, the site posts a request for proposal (RFP) for personal defense weapons for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

This RFP is not for the traditional armed forces. This solicitation is specific to law enforcement who almost exclusively work within and along the borders of the United States. Certainly the threats ICE officers may be subject to are the same exact threats law-abiding residents could be subject to.

Section C of solicitation number HSCEMS-12-R-00011 is pretty specific. Here is a direct link to the Section C PDF (246KB). My emphasis in bold. Notice the term assault weapon or assault rifle is not used anywhere in the document.


The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components. …

In paragraph 3.1 under requirements and testing standards we read…


DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.

Isn’t that inconvenient for the gun control politicians? In requirement paragraph 3.9.10, they find a need for a 30-round magazine.


The action shall be capable of accepting all standard NATO STANAG 20 and 30 round M16 magazines (NSN 1005-00-921-5004) and Magpul 30 round PMAG (NSN 1005-01-576-5159). The magazine well shall be designed to allow easy insertion of a magazine.

In paragraph 3.21.2, they again specify the requirement for a 30-round magazine.


The magazine shall have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.

If you did not catch the interesting part in one of the quoted sentences above, let me point it out to you. The personal defense weapon should be select-fire capable.


DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters…

The action shall be select-fire (capable of semi-automatic and automatic fire).

From the Fire Control Section, paragraph 3.10.1.


The fire control selector shall have three positions; safe, semi-automatic, and automatic. The selector shall have positions which are clearly labeled for the mode of fire.

This formal DHS RFP – which is specific concerning requirements – clearly indicates a select-fire rifle is appropriate for personal defense in close quarters. If it is appropriate for law enforcement, why is it not appropriate for civilian use?

As mentioned before, citizens and gun owners have compromised during the last 75 years including making access to automatic fire rifles extremely restricted to the point you can not buy a new one from any gun dealer or manufacture.


The National Firearms Act of 1934, the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, the Gun Control Act of 1968, the creation of the ATF in 1972, the Law Enforcement Act Protection Act of 1986, the Gun-Free Schools Act of 1990, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1994, the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994, and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005 were all federal laws designed to restrict the ownership of specific firearm categories, restrict ownership in general, or make us “more safe.” Of course, state laws have also been implemented as a compromise. The permit process in many states includes high fees, required training, multi-page applications, interviews with officers, interviews with law enforcement administrators, officers visiting your neighbors, yearly reviews, and finger printing in booking rooms among other requirements.

And again…


[Excerpt]

Read more:
Department of Homeland Security: Sport rifle (AR-15) ?suitable for personal defense? | Radio Vice Online

 

[bucs90]

Whats your point? That since ICE agents have select-fire weapons, that every redneck on a farm in America should too?

ICE agents seek out and confront drug cartel members, who carry full auto AK47s, and other military grade weapons. The likelihood of an ICE agent encountering heavy firepower is far greater than Ricky-Bobby Burns of 101 Redneck Boulevard, Mississippi.

Did you know your local county SWAT team almost surely carries OC/CN/CS gas grenades, "flash" grenades, full auto sub-machine guns, and other items that you and I are probably not allowed to have, or would have a tremendously difficult time obtaining? Yep. They sure do. Why? Because they SEEK OUT confrontation with very dangerous people. You do not.

Do you need personal protection? Yes. You are entitled to it, it is a RIGHT. I agree. Should you be allowed to have an AR15? Yes. I have one.

But you are making the argument that anything ICE has, or law enforcement has, you should too. Why stop there? The Coast Guard is primarily a domestic law enforcement and rescue agency. They have massive, fully automatic .50 caliber machine guns on their boats for things they may encounter on US waterways. Well....you and I boat on those same US waters. Shouldnt we have a full auto .50 cal on our speed boats?

 

[bucs90]

You said: "If it is appropriate for law enforcement, why is it not appropriate for civilian use?"

The answer to that is plain and simple. YOU are not in law enforcement.

There are weapons that the military has, but law enforcement does not, because LE is not the military. Would an M1 tank with full auto .50 cals and a huge cannon be more effective at taking out a man barricaded with a gun popping shots at cops? YES, it would, so would an Apache helicopter.

However, the cops aren't the military. Its a different world altogether. So they wont get, or use, an Abrams tank or Apache helicopter....even if it would be more effective....to take on the barricaded man with a gun. Because its LE, not the military.

Just like YOU aren't hunting down and seeking out confrontation with the worst of the worst people living inside our borders. LE does to that. You do not. Its different.

 

[Politico]

Bullshit troll. LE can buy anything the military can.

 

[OKTexas]

Won't this be handy in any challenge of the NY law? Cuomo ain't gonna like it.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Just about any hunter you talk to (And I'm SURE you Liberals talk to them all the time) will tell you that the AR-15 is a GREAT varmint hunting rifle. And if that's the weapon you use for varmints or it's what you fired in the Service, then it only makes sense to have one for home and personal protection because you're so familiar with it. And until recently, the ammo was fairly cheap.

My Dad has an old AR-15 without the forward assist that I'm trying to take off his hands for just that purpose.

 

[Bigfoot]

I don't have any use or desire to own an automatic weapon but I have several firearms that will appear on the ban list if this bullshit goes anywhere. I still think that Bill Clinton is right and that Obama better back-off but I doubt the boy king will think he needs to. I guess we will all find out in time. ~shrug~

 

[Bigfoot]

Just about any hunter you talk to (And I'm SURE you Liberals talk to them all the time) will tell you that the AR-15 is a GREAT varmint hunting rifle. And if that's the weapon you use for varmints or it's what you fired in the Service, then it only makes sense to have one for home and personal protection because you're so familiar with it. And until recently, the ammo was fairly cheap.

My Dad has an old AR-15 without the forward assist that I'm trying to take off his hands for just that purpose.

My Dad had a Springfield 30-06 that he used to hunt deer with and it was almost the exact same weapon that he carried in the war. I had an M-16 or an Ithaca .45acp grease gun and a Colt 1911 when I was in. I now have a .223 rifle and a .45 acp and I don't plan on giving up either one of them.

 

[OKTexas]

Whats your point? That since ICE agents have select-fire weapons, that every redneck on a farm in America should too?

ICE agents seek out and confront drug cartel members, who carry full auto AK47s, and other military grade weapons. The likelihood of an ICE agent encountering heavy firepower is far greater than Ricky-Bobby Burns of 101 Redneck Boulevard, Mississippi.

Did you know your local county SWAT team almost surely carries OC/CN/CS gas grenades, "flash" grenades, full auto sub-machine guns, and other items that you and I are probably not allowed to have, or would have a tremendously difficult time obtaining? Yep. They sure do. Why? Because they SEEK OUT confrontation with very dangerous people. You do not.

Do you need personal protection? Yes. You are entitled to it, it is a RIGHT. I agree. Should you be allowed to have an AR15? Yes. I have one.

But you are making the argument that anything ICE has, or law enforcement has, you should too. Why stop there? The Coast Guard is primarily a domestic law enforcement and rescue agency. They have massive, fully automatic .50 caliber machine guns on their boats for things they may encounter on US waterways. Well....you and I boat on those same US waters. Shouldnt we have a full auto .50 cal on our speed boats?

Are the bad guys they encounter any different than the ones that could kick in your door? Are you saying your not entitled to the same effective firepower the cops use against them? Just ask'n.