It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
This nomenclature (Personal Defense Weapons) implies to me that the arms will be issued to DHS personnel for their own protection - not for conducting checkpoint searches or home gun confiscations - sheer hypocrisy if you ask me.
The modern usage of the term carbine covers much the same scope as it always had, namely lighter weapons (generally rifles) with barrels less than 457.2 mm (18 inches). These weapons can be considered carbines, while rifles with barrels of 457.2 mm (18 inches) or more are generally not considered carbines unless specifically named so, and depending on the weapon's power. Modern carbines use ammunition ranging from that used in light pistols up to powerful rifle cartridges, with the usual exception of high velocity magnum cartridges. In the more powerful cartridges, the short barrel of a carbine has significant disadvantages in velocity, and the high residual pressure when the bullet exits the barrel results in substantially greater muzzle blast. Flash suppressors and muzzle brakes are common solutions to this problem, which may ease their acceptance.
Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by solomons path
Yes I have seen that term used in articles for SBRs and especially modular SMGs in handgun calibres (like the Kriss .45).
edit on 26-1-2013 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Merinda
What exactly does Homeland security do? What do they need AR-15s for?
The department of homeland security wants 7,000 PDWs (personal defense weapons)
AKA "assault weapons" when owned by civilians.
Originally posted by Mamatus
People need to keep in mind that the DHS also now includes the US Coast Guard. The USCG needs those weapons for drug interdiction, combating piracy etc etc.
USCG
I truly think they are not intended for use against Citizens.
Originally posted by Mamatus
reply to post by DarthMuerte
I actually don't think we need the same weapons. A sweet AR-15? You bet. The point I was trying to make is that we as citizens will never have or need the same weapons. We need personal defense weapons, no doubt. However no matter how big a gun you have nor how much ammo you can hoard will stop a Hellfire Missile should the Government decide you are too well dug in.
The only way (or chance) to beat back the gun grabbers is with logical arguments. Start telling people we need the same weapons as the Military and you are simply going to bolster their argument.
With your logic we all need drones (;
Originally posted by dc4lifeskater
so if we dont need them.. why do they...
Originally posted by Maxatoria
reply to post by seabag
Given its a government contract it'll take 2-3 years before its signed and then they get to actually produce of the weapons followed by 6 months to a year of testing & evaluation and assuming everything works out they'll produce the remainder of the batch just in time for them to be classed as obsolete but still will then require the DHS officers to be trained on them so any supply problems today won't affect them but in 2015-16 if theres supply shortages then worry
Originally posted by WaterBottle
The AR-15 wasn't even banned in the last assault weapons ban so...........
read the rest here
In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of cosmetic features…….