Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Heard from a friend that there may be a plan by the government to flood the ammunition market with bad bulk ammo that will either degrade much faster than standard ammunition or will be purposefully inbalanced as to cause a catastrophic malfunction in the firearm that is being used.

 

Unfortunately, I have no links to support this yet, but I thought I'd put this out there, just in case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is true I would think you would still be safe buying known brands from reputable sellers. If you see some new brand hit the market that no one has heard of I might be skeptical. But for them to package ammo using some one elses registered trade mark,especially defective ammo. I believe would get challenged in court very quickly by the manufacturer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they really WERE going to do something like that, they wouldn't bother making a new brand (I know I wouldn't). I'd just have people sell the stuff at gun shows or wherever. But without any source or proof, it's just all conjecture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there are only a handful of ammunition manufacturers where the government has any say on how anything is done, and in that case it's just to make sure that production is up to their standards - how do you think we get XM855, XM193, etc? it either is production runoff, or fails one or more quality checks.

 

so you think that the government is going to somehow sneak in and sabotage the production lines of the only ammo plants they have any sway in. yeah sounds like a great way for the government to implicate themselves in numerous personal injury lawsuits, based only on the assumption that whatever ammo they sabotage is getting stockpiled for "SHTF", and not used to let little Jimmy fire his dad's AR-15 on the family farm at watermelons next Saturday - until an overcharged load sends a bolt carrier flying back into his face and he never makes it to school that monday.

 

somehow no word of this being done would ever get out of the production plants, which employ thousands of blue-collar average Joe workers on the production lines?

 

LOAD OF COMPLETE CRAP.

Edited by mancat
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 3 kinds of ammo in the military, overhead fire, non-overhead and condemmed. Overhead fire is the best of the best, the non-overhead which is still OK for combat use, and condemmed which is not to be used as it's unsafe.

 

Condemmed ammo either gets pulled for rebuild or totally destroyed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually what I heard is there are plans in place to start making the PRIMERS degrade over time, making it harder for people to stockpile ammo. It will have a "shelf life" so you have to use up what you buy, before it goes bad. Heard something about them planning to add some type of petroleum to the charge that will slowly leach into it and make it where it won't go bang.

Link to post
Share on other sites

how do you think "military surplus ammunition" gets on the market? it's not surplus, but rather was rejected by the military because it failed some quality assurance test by LOT number, so the manufactured dumps the ammunition on the civilian market. doesn't mean it's dangerous, just didn't pass a quality test, ie. sealant around the primer let in water etc...

 

so put away the tin foil beanie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumors about government mandated shelf life on ammo and primers has been around a looooong time... and always stems from what people think the government would do further civilian disarmament in America.

 

The problem is that to accomplish anything, it would have to be implemented on a huge scale and involve most major manufacturers. Subversion of American and foreign ammo manufacturers to these ends would be impossible to do quietly among all of the other necessary factors that would be equally unlikely.

 

Kinda like the rumors that Wal-Mart sells only 'seconds' of products like guns and tires that are rejects from the manufacturer. If that were true given the volume that Wal-Mart moves, then the amount of 'seconds' these companies would have to produce would make up probably 25% (and probably more) of their total production. It just doesn't add up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kinda like the rumors that Wal-Mart sells only 'seconds' of products like guns and tires that are rejects from the manufacturer. If that were true given the volume that Wal-Mart moves, then the amount of 'seconds' these companies would have to produce would make up probably 25% (and probably more) of their total production. It just doesn't add up.

 

Excellent point... My company makes products that have been house hold names for over 100 years and has been around for almost 200 years. We sell NO "seconds" ever... Not to employees, not to churches, not to anyone. Our products are carried at every Walmart in the US, if not the world.

 

Most manufacturers are simply not going to risk their reputation, or a law suit, on a substandard product.

 

I have to hope that US soldier's lives absolutely fall into that area. Any failure by design would add that much more unpredictability to its intended use.

 

Besides, with a little bit of FIFO inventory control your ammo stockpile won't be more than a few years older than its purchase date, plus original age, at any given point. Buy a bunch and fire the oldest stuff first. I simply date my ammo boxes to make sure that happens. If I have an inventory so large that it's possible for it to become very ancient (right now, x54R since I only have the 91/30 for it), then I'm prepared to deal with it.

Edited by Maxwelhse
Link to post
Share on other sites
how do you think "military surplus ammunition" gets on the market? it's not surplus, but rather was rejected by the military because it failed some quality assurance test by LOT number, so the manufactured dumps the ammunition on the civilian market. doesn't mean it's dangerous, just didn't pass a quality test, ie. sealant around the primer let in water etc...

 

so put away the tin foil beanie.

Do you have actual proof of this? If Federal for example is selling "surplus" Military spec M855, they would hardly sell it labeled as Mil-spec ammo if it didn't meet the standards set forth by the DOD or somebody would debunk it and have their ass in court for fraud. Why don't you put away YOUR tin foil beanie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read some interesting accounts of the CIA doing that to the enemy during Vietnam, but I'd call BS on that happening in the US civilian market.

 

On one occasion, during the war, the bolt from a soldiers AK was blown out the back of the rifle and into his face. An interesting story, if it was true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have actual proof of this? If Federal for example is selling "surplus" Military spec M855, they would hardly sell it labeled as Mil-spec ammo if it didn't meet the standards set forth by the DOD or somebody would debunk it and have their ass in court for fraud.

 

"mil-spec" is nothing more then a marketing gimmick phrase in the civilian market, and can mean anything, the caliber, the kind of finish on rifle parts or on the gun, a camo pattern etc.. . you can call anything "mil-spec" and nobody in the civilian sector is going to sue that it isn't, or be charged with fraud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I read some interesting accounts of the CIA doing that to the enemy during Vietnam, but I'd call BS on that happening in the US civilian market.

On one occasion, during the war, the bolt from a soldiers AK was blown out the back of the rifle and into his face. An interesting story, if it was true.

The actual tactic is to find an ammo cache and taint a bunch of the ammo by replacing the propellant with C4 explosive. Still done to this day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Do you have actual proof of this? If Federal for example is selling "surplus" Military spec M855, they would hardly sell it labeled as Mil-spec ammo if it didn't meet the standards set forth by the DOD or somebody would debunk it and have their ass in court for fraud.

"mil-spec" is nothing more then a marketing gimmick phrase in the civilian market, and can mean anything, the caliber, the kind of finish on rifle parts or on the gun, a camo pattern etc.. . you can call anything "mil-spec" and nobody in the civilian sector is going to sue that it isn't, or be charged with fraud.

Labeling ammo M855 is giving it a Military designation which in turn makes it Mil-spec ammo. Federal isn't going to try and fool you with a Military designator and sell you cheap .223 Remington instead of 5.56 NATO. I know LE Departments purchase this stuff all the time and some do have resources to check the duty ammo being purchased. Edited by MT Predator
Link to post
Share on other sites

XM855 is rejected ammo from a test. It most often is an issue with sealant or velocity. If one batch fails, the entire LOT is rejected. They will also over run the LOT and have extras. They never sell bunk ammo. Even if it failed velocity, it will still be much hotter than commercial 5.56.

 

Big bro isn't going to give us pop rounds any time soon. Corporations run the ammo not the state.

 

I think they would rather send guns to mexico or put live ammo into guns at shows.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I read some interesting accounts of the CIA doing that to the enemy during Vietnam, but I'd call BS on that happening in the US civilian market.

On one occasion, during the war, the bolt from a soldiers AK was blown out the back of the rifle and into his face. An interesting story, if it was true.

The actual tactic is to find an ammo cache and taint a bunch of the ammo by replacing the propellant with C4 explosive. Still done to this day.

Or double charge the shell. My uncle remembers a couple of armorers in Nam who'd do that. Pop the bullets from 2 rounds, dump the powder into one shell, jam the bullet back in, randomly load it in a stripper clip or mag. Want to see the effects?

 

http://youtu.be/fYeQN2P88p8

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The actual tactic is to find an ammo cache and taint a bunch of the ammo by replacing the propellant with C4 explosive. Still done to this day.

 

Considering C4 wouldn't detonate from a primer or gun powder ignition, I doubt this is how its done. In Vietnam the project was codenamed Eldest Son. There's lots of info about it online. I can't speak about how or if the project is continued today in some form or fashion... but I can imagine that a little thermite mix inside of a cartridge would do quite a number towards welding an AK's action shut... and wouldn't run the risk of injuring green forces that might come in contact with the same modified munitions. Who knows...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The actual tactic is to find an ammo cache and taint a bunch of the ammo by replacing the propellant with C4 explosive. Still done to this day.

 

Considering C4 wouldn't detonate from a primer or gun powder ignition, I doubt this is how its done.

You're correct. It was a binary composition similar in every way to the enemy's gun powder except that it created 250,000 p.s.i. :) They never did spill the beans on exactly what the stuff was made of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

C4 boosted with some propellant ignited by the primer will not create the brisance C4 normally demonstrates when it is ignited with a blasting cap or det cord but it will burn at a much different rate than the propellant itself. Remember, the "explosion" in high explosives is actually the burn rate of the explosive. C4 in a cartridge isn't going to make the rifle a bomb but it will make it fail catastrophically. You can light C4 with a lighter and it will burn like Sterno. Hit it with a hammer and see what happens. I have never seen this tactic used personally but heard it has been done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

C4 (RDX) is hexamine + nitric acid with plastic binder. Hexamine is used in solid fuel cookstoves, and military trioxane fuel tablets. Hexamine is also the product of ammonia and formaldehyde.

 

Most denatured alcohol is denatured with formaldehyde. Might try adding ammonia to it and precipitate out the hexamine, for cheap booze!

 

Although, the alcohol would be better for crystalizing potassium nitrate made from your compost pile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I read some interesting accounts of the CIA doing that to the enemy during Vietnam, but I'd call BS on that happening in the US civilian market.

On one occasion, during the war, the bolt from a soldiers AK was blown out the back of the rifle and into his face. An interesting story, if it was true.

The actual tactic is to find an ammo cache and taint a bunch of the ammo by replacing the propellant with C4 explosive. Still done to this day.

Damn. Just.............damn. Talk about trigger flinch!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Heard from a friend that there may be a plan by the government to flood the ammunition market with bad bulk ammo that will either degrade much faster than standard ammunition or will be purposefully inbalanced as to cause a catastrophic malfunction in the firearm that is being used.

 

Unfortunately, I have no links to support this yet, but I thought I'd put this out there, just in case.

Please provide a source. Otherwise, IMHO it is complete bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...