In an article yesterday, David Codrea warned about a new policy being implemented by the DoD to scrap once fired brass, rather than sell it for re-use to companies like Georgia Arms, who reload the ammunition for training. "Range Ammo" we call it, and range ammo is used in quite high amounts by law enforcement and by civilians seeking to improve their effectiveness with weapons, as well as for target practice.
Of course this is wrong on so many levels. First, by scrapping brass instead of selling it for re manufacture, the value of the brass is cut in half. Not a good use of taxpayer funds by an agency that has a fiduciary responsibility to spend our funds wisely. Second, at a time when jobs are short, it would seem that every job that the DoD can save in the U.S. would be one less person on the public dole. Georgia Arms will have to lay off half its workforce if this policy stands. Third, at a time when ammunition supplies are already tight, and local budgets are stretched, law enforcement agencies hardly need to pay more for the ammunition used than they have to.
Perhaps this is just some zany idea, hatched in the bowels of the Pentagon, by someone who didn't know what he or she was doing. You would be surprised how often such things happen. But given the "The One's" penchant for illegally disarming his "subjects" it sure feels like a backdoor approach to banning so called "assault weapons." After all, guns without ammunition are just clubs. Please write you Congressmen and Senators, and ask them to take action to end this policy now.
Update: Well, that was fast. I am embarrassed to be behind on this curve. Kurt Hoffman reports that the policy is rescinded. A win for the gun owning community. I would like to point out that I do not personally own a rifle that fires either .223 or .308 , yet I sent my Senator a letter yesterday, requesting he take action. Whether you are a hunter, a target shooter, an instructor, a collector or any other type of gun owner, we should all stand shoulder to shoulder when any segment of our community is attacked. An attack on one of us should be seen as an attack on all.