Although I’ve seen and read several online blurbs about this vehicle of late, I decided to dig slightly deeper and discover more about the vehicle itself.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03 ... stockpile/








Video says they use them for high risk warrant service.FiremanBob wrote:I would like to see some TV reporter from the WH beat have the stones to demand an answer from Zero about the intended use of these MRAPs. He can't say they're for training and practice, like the ammo. He can't say they are for illegal aliens or for fighting the Mexican drug cartels, or for finding small cells of Islamic terrorists. It would be fun to see him sweat and stumble out his BS answer on national TV so everyone can view it.

Or any insurgents planting IEDs...DaRoller wrote:Video says they use them for high risk warrant service.FiremanBob wrote:I would like to see some TV reporter from the WH beat have the stones to demand an answer from Zero about the intended use of these MRAPs. He can't say they're for training and practice, like the ammo. He can't say they are for illegal aliens or for fighting the Mexican drug cartels, or for finding small cells of Islamic terrorists. It would be fun to see him sweat and stumble out his BS answer on national TV so everyone can view it.
Can't say as I've seen a mine field in the US recently....

1. That's what we have robots for. This thing is useless for regular bomb threats which occur inside/around facilities. If it's a road-side IED like Iraq (when was the last time we had one of those in the US?), I'm pretty sure driving up to it isn't a smart idea. Even in Iraq we secured the area and then robots/EOD in to dispose of it. We certainly didn't drive up to it just to check it out because even these armored personnel carries have their limits.RWBlue01 wrote:1. If there is a bomb threat, get in close and look something over.
2. If there is a standoff with an active shooter, get in close to try to take them out.
3. If there is a sniper like the one in TX a few years back, get in close and get hurt people out of the way.
quote="gunderwood"]DaRoller wrote: Can't say as I've seen a mine field in the US recently....
Or any insurgents planting IEDs...DaRoller wrote:Video says they use them for high risk warrant service.FiremanBob wrote:I would like to see some TV reporter from the WH beat have the stones to demand an answer from Zero about the intended use of these MRAPs. He can't say they're for training and practice, like the ammo. He can't say they are for illegal aliens or for fighting the Mexican drug cartels, or for finding small cells of Islamic terrorists. It would be fun to see him sweat and stumble out his BS answer on national TV so everyone can view it.
Can't say as I've seen a mine field in the US recently....



Yes, they could install armaments on them. I suspect if they started showing these things with remote-controlled, full auto M2s on top that would raise too much interest. As configured for the video, it's basically a APC which has little to no value in the USA unless the DHS rumors are true. There simply isn't a need for DHS agents to be riding around on US highways in APCs like it's Baghdad or something.FiremanBob wrote:According to army-technology.com there is no standard armament pack on the MRAP, but a variety of remote-controlled, turret-based automatic weapons can be installed. The article doesn't say what accessories these 2700 DHS MRAPs will have.

Bingo!gunderwood wrote:As configured for the video, it's basically a APC which has little to no value in the USA unless the DHS rumors are true. There simply isn't a need for DHS agents to be riding around on US highways in APCs like it's Baghdad or something.


They are just tools. However, the government is purchasing these tools on our dime, so they are accountable to us. Yes, police departments around the country have purchased all kinds of cool toys in the past, but just because they have done it before doesn't mean it's a valid expense today or even then. These are the same departments that can't take a couple % budget cut without laying off half the force...because they overspent buying toys.RWBlue01 wrote:For those looking at the usage, this is just like any other tool or gun.
Yes, it could be used to put down a revolution.
Yes, it could be used to put down a race issue.
Yes, it could be used to put down a terrorist issue.
Yes, these could sit in the police parking lot and rust away. Only being used once a year for some good old boys to go hunting in them.
Forgot to address this last time. Tanks would be just as big a waste of money, but would actually concern me less. Most of the country lives in urban areas where a tank is practically useless. It's considered a classic, tactical folly to drive tanks into urban areas, they're just too vulnerable. APCs on the other hand are designed for such urban combat. The key word here is combat. For real LEA use, they're expensive toys that aren't good for much of anything. However, as a tool to use military tactics against the people, they're ideal.RWBlue01 wrote:First off, the item pictured is not a tank it is an armored truck...Now a TANK, that is a different story.


SWAT equally has no use for riding around in an APC. Most of the ones I've seen are really light armor, think pistol rounds, not multiple .50BMG rated on the glass. In either case it's a waste of tax dollars.MarcSpaz wrote:What I don't get is local, county and state police agencies all over the country have had armored SWAT vehicles that look and are equipped like this for decades. So way is it an issue for DHS? You guys are getting too paranoid.

All of those are urban APCs. SWAT has no lawful use for them and they are a waste of tax payer dollars. It wasn't that long ago when the site of something like that on the countries streets implied dictatorship and no freedom.MarcSpaz wrote:A few examples
Passaic County S.W.A.T. team
http://media.northjersey.com/images/012 ... mobile.jpg
New Orleans Metro Police LAV-25 C2 Vehicle.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-67IhlZas03M/U ... 086cx3.jpg
Chicago Police MRAP
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N4W1v5CrAn0/U ... 279-vi.jpg
Doraville Police M-113A3
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KPEOp045Rs0/U ... lle_lg.jpg

I have no issue with local law enforcement SWAT units having this type of vehicle. My question is, why does Homeland Security (e.g. the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT) need them at all and in that quantity?MarcSpaz wrote:What I don't get is local, county and state police agencies all over the country have had armored SWAT vehicles that look and are equipped like this for decades. So why is it an issue for DHS? You guys are getting too paranoid.
