DOCSLIB.ORG

Centralized Inventory Management of the Army Supply System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Centralized Inventory Management of the Army Supply System Army Regulation 710–1 Inventory Management Centralized Inventory Management of the Army Supply System Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 20 September 2007 UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY of CHANGE AR 710–1 Centralized Inventory Management of the Army Supply System This rapid action revision, dated 20 September 2007-- o Aligns new battle/operational loss procedures (paras 1-9 and 1-10). o Establishes the U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command Centralized Ammunition Management Office as the primary agent for the Army to manage wholesale and retail ammunition stocks (para 3-20a). o Makes administrative changes throughout. Headquarters *Army Regulation 710–1 Department of the Army Washington, DC 20 September 2007 Effective 20 October 2007 Inventory Management Centralized Inventory Management of the Army Supply System I d e n t i f i c a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y ( h t t p : / / w w w . Army management control process. dodait.com/). This regulation contains management con- Applicability. This regulation applies to trol provisions and identifies key manage- t h e A c t i v e A r m y , t h e A r m y N a t i o n a l ment controls that must be evaluated (see Guard/Army National Guard of the United appendix B). States, and the U.S. Army Reserve, unless S u p p l e m e n t a t i o n . S u p p l e m e n t a t i o n o f o t h e r w i s e s t a t e d . D u r i n g m o b i l i z a t i o n , c h a p t e r s a n d p o l i c i e s c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s this regulation and establishment of com- r e g u l a t i o n m a y b e m o d i f i e d b y t h e mand and local forms are prohibited with- proponent. out prior approval from the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4 (DALO-SMP), Washington, Proponent and exception authority. DC 20310-0546. The proponent of this regulation is the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4. The propo- Suggested improvements. Users are nent has the authority to approve excep- invited to send comments and suggested tions to this regulation that are consistent improvements on DA Form 2028 (Recom- History. This publication is a rapid action with controlling law and regulations. The m e n d e d C h a n g e s t o P u b l i c a t i o n s a n d r e v i s i o n . T h e p o r t i o n s a f f e c t e d b y t h i s proponent may delegate this approval au- Blank Forms) directly to Director, U.S. r a p i d a c t i o n r e v i s i o n a r e l i s t e d i n t h e t h o r i t y , i n w r i t i n g , t o a d i v i s i o n c h i e f A r m y L o g i s t i c s I n n o v a t i o n A g e n c y , within the proponent agency or its direct summary of change. ATTN: LOIA-AP, 5870 21st Street, Build- reporting unit or field operating agency, in Summary. This regulation is a consoli- the grade of colonel or the civilian equiv- ing 212, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060–5941. dation of several regulations that set pol- alent. Activities may request a waiver to Distribution. This publication is availa- i c y a n d p r o c e d u r a l g u i d a n c e f o r this regulation by providing justification ble in electronic media only and is in- m a n a g e m e n t o f s e c o n d a r y a n d m a j o r that includes a full analysis of the ex- t e n d e d f o r c o m m a n d l e v e l C f o r t h e items, stockage categories, retention lev- pected benefits and must include formal Active Army, the Army National Guard/ e l s , f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e n t , o p e r a t i o n a l review by the activity’s senior legal offi- A r m y N a t i o n a l G u a r d o f t h e U n i t e d and repair cycle float, Army war reserve, cer. All waiver requests will be endorsed and the Automatic Return Item Program. by the commander or senior leader of the States, and the U.S. Army Reserve. Where applicable, it ensures compliance requesting activity and forwarded through with policy as prescribed by the DOD Im- t h e i r h i g h e r h e a d q u a r t e r s t o t h e p o l i c y plementation Plan for Logistics Automatic proponent. Refer to AR 25–30 for specific guidance. Contents (Listed by paragraph and page number) Chapter 1 Introduction, page 1 Section I General, page 1 Purpose • 1–1, page 1 References • 1–2, page 1 Explanation of abbreviations and terms • 1–3, page 1 Section II Responsibilities, page 1 *This regulation supersedes AR 710-1, dated 6 September 2005. AR 710–1 • 20 September 2007 i UNCLASSIFIED Contents—Continued Deputy Chief of Staff, G–4 • 1–4, page 1 Deputy Chief of Staff, G–3 • 1–5, page 2 Assistant Secretary of the Army Acquisition, Logistics and Technology • 1–6, page 4 Commanding Generals of Army Commands, Army Service Component Commands, and Direct Reporting Units • 1–7, page 4 The Commanding General, U.S. Army Materiel Command • 1–8, page 5 Commanders of U.S. Army Materiel Command major subordinate commands • 1–9, page 6 Executive Director, U.S. Army Materiel Command Logistics Support Activity • 1–10, page 8 Director, U.S. Army Communications Security Logistics Activity • 1–11, page 9 Commandant, U.S. Army Quartermaster Center and School • 1–12, page 9 Chief of Engineers • 1–13, page 9 The Surgeon General • 1–14, page 9 Commander, U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command • 1–15, page 10 Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management & Comptroller • 1–16, page 10 Chief, National Guard Bureau • 1–17, page 10 Chief Army Reserve • 1–18, page 10 Heads of designated secondary item control activities • 1–19, page 10 The Army Materiel Command supply coordinator at the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Life Cycle Management Command for obsolete or excess end items • 1–20, page 11 The Project Manager for instrumentation, targets, and threat simulators • 1–21, page 11 Users of threat representative targets • 1–22, page 11 Commander, U.S. Aviation Missile Command U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Management Command • 1–23, page 12 Commander, U.S. Army Safety Center and the responsible command • 1–24, page 12 Commanding General, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command • 1–25, page 12 Deputy Chief of Staff, G–1 • 1–26, page 12 Director, Program Analysis and Evaluation, Office of the Chief of Staff • 1–27, page 12 Heads of Army staff agencies, commanding generals of major Army commands , and program executive officers • 1–28, page 12 Headquarters, Department of the Army, Chief Information Officer/G–6 • 1–29, page 12 Commander, U.S. Army Medical Materiel Agency • 1–30, page 12 Director, product manager, sets, kits, outfits, and tools • 1–31, page 13 Defense Logistic Information Services, Army Cataloging Directorate • 1–32, page 13 Section III Compliance, page 13 Deviation • 1–33, page 13 Management control review • 1–34, page 13 Chapter 2 Integrated Materiel Management and Stockage Policy, page 13 Section I Integrated Materiel Management Assignment, page 13 Overview • 2–1, page 13 Integrated materiel management • 2–2, page 14 Criteria for assigning item management codes • 2–3, page 14 Interchangeability and substitutability • 2–4, page 14 Defense Inactive Item Program • 2–5, page 15 Section II Stockage Criteria, page 15 Stockage review frequency • 2–6, page 15 Part-numbered items • 2–7, page 15 Part Number Conversion Program • 2–8, page 15 Local purchase items • 2–9, page 16 ii AR 710–1 • 20 September 2007 Contents—Continued Management determination logic schematic • 2–10, page 16 Cost differential • 2–11, page 19 Numeric stockage objective and insurance items • 2–12, page 20 Diminishing manufacturing sources and materiel shortages • 2–13, page 20 Life-of-type buys • 2–14, page 21 Assignment of the acquisition advice code • 2–15, page 21 Section III Materiel Support Requests, page 21 Supply support requests • 2–16, page 21 Stockage alternatives • 2–17, page 24 Special program requirements • 2–18, page 25 Nonconsumable item materiel support requests • 2–19, page 27 Section IV Transfers of Assets, page 27 Transfers within the Army • 2–20, page 27 Transfers between the Army and other Services • 2–21, page 27 Transfers to allied forces • 2–22, page 28 Transfers to Federal agencies outside the Department of Defense • 2–23, page 28 Logistical transfers • 2–24, page 28 Transfers of cryptological materiel • 2–25, page 28 Chapter 3 Inventory Management Control Programs, page 28 Section I Component Items of Equipment Assemblages, page 28 Assemblage and component policy • 3–1, page 28 Managing assemblages and components • 3–2, page 29 Section II Selected Item Management System-Expanded, page 29 Purpose of the Selected Item Management System-Expanded • 3–3, page 29 Selection criteria • 3–4, page 30 Selected Item Management System-Expanded reporting • 3–5, page 30 Selected Item Management System-Expanded actions • 3–6, page 30 Performance evaluation reports • 3–7, page 30 Section III Positioning of Stocks, page 31 Secondary item assets • 3–8, page 31 Ammunition • 3–9, page 31 Requirements for additional storage facilities and services • 3–10, page 32 Section IV Automatic Return Items, page 32 Applicability of automated return items • 3–11, page 32 Automated return item policy • 3–12, page 32 Automatic return item objectives • 3–13, page 33 Automated return item selection criteria • 3–14, page 33 Field maintenance level retention criteria for automated return items • 3–15, page 33 Automatic return procedures • 3–16, page 34 Receipt of automated return items at sustainment or national level • 3–17, page 34 Credit for return of Supply Management, Army items • 3–18, page 34 AR 710–1 • 20 September 2007 iii Contents—Continued Disposition of automated return item components of major items • 3–19, page 34 Section V Special Commodity Control Programs, page 35 Managing ammunition • 3–20, page 35 Obsolete
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case #2 United States of America (Respondent)
    Model International Court of Justice (MICJ) Case #2 United States of America (Respondent) Relocation of the United States Embassy to Jerusalem (Palestine v. United States of America) Arkansas Model United Nations (AMUN) November 20-21, 2020 Teeter 1 Historical Context For years, there has been a consistent struggle between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine led by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In 2018, United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the U.S. embassy located in Tel Aviv would be moving to the city of Jerusalem.1 Palestine, angered by the embassy moving, filed a case with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2018.2 The history of this case, U.S. relations with Israel and Palestine, current events, and why the ICJ should side with the United States will be covered in this research paper. Israel and Palestine have an interesting relationship between war and competition. In 1948, Israel captured the west side of Jerusalem, and the Palestinians captured the east side during the Arab-Israeli War. Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948. In 1949, the Lausanne Conference took place, and the UN came to the decision for “corpus separatum” which split Jerusalem into a Jewish zone and an Arab zone.3 At this time, the State of Israel decided that Jerusalem was its “eternal capital.”4 “Corpus separatum,” is a Latin term meaning “a city or region which is given a special legal and political status different from its environment, but which falls short of being sovereign, or an independent city-state.”5 1 Office of the President, 82 Recognizing Jerusalem as the Capital of the State of Israel and Relocating the United States Embassy to Israel to Jerusalem § (2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Standards in Weapons Training (Special Operations Forces)
    Department of the Army Pamphlet 350–39 Training Standards in Weapons Training (Special Operations Forces) Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 3 July 1997 UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY of CHANGE DA PAM 350–39 Standards in Weapons Training (Special Operations Forces) This revision-- o Deletes requirements for M72A2 light antitank weapon (LAW) (Chap 2). o Deletes requirements for ranger antiarmor-antipersonnel weapon system (RAAWS) (Chap 2). o Deletes requirements for Stinger crews (Chap 2). o Deletes requirements for mine warfare (Chap 2). o Deletes requirements for MGXX warfare (Chap 2). o Deletes requirements for CAR15 warfare (Chap 2). o Deletes requirements for Combat Training Center (CTC) (Chap 2). o Adds requirements for rocket propelled grenades (RPG) (Chap 3). o Adds requirements for close-quarters combat (CQC) (Chap 3). o Adds requirements for recoilless rifles (RCRL) 84-mm and 90-mm (Chap 3). o Adds requirements for Stinger crews (Chap 3). o Adds requirements for mortars 107-mm (Chap 3). Headquarters *Department of the Army Department of the Army Pamphlet 350–39 Washington, DC 3 July 1997 Training Standards in Weapons Training (Special Operations Forces) procedures for planning, resourcing, and exe- of Staff for Operations and Plans may dele- cuting training. It includes weapons qualifica- gate this authority, in writing, to a division tion standards, suggested training programs, chief within the proponent agency or a field and ammunition requirements for the attain- operating agency in the grade of colonel or ment and sustainment of weapons proficien- the civilian equivalent. c y . T h e p r o g r a m s i n c o r p o r a t e t r a i n i n g devices and simulators.
    [Show full text]
  • STE-LTS Innovator NETWORX
    STE-LTS Innovator NETWORX Wednesday, January 20, 2021 What is an Innovator NETWORX? • A virtual teaming event that allows you to interact with other NSTXL innovators • Discuss your company’s capabilities as it pertains to this opportunity • Start a dialogue with innovators • Continue the conversation after the event on NSTXL Community How It Works • Alpha order by company • When you see your slide, unmute yourself on Teams by pressing the microphone button. • After a company presents, participants can ask questions by raising their hand. You will be called on by a member of the NSTXL team when it is your time to ask your question. • After the event, go to the STE-LTS teaming board on NSTXL community and start teaming. • Send private messages to those you have heard from during the call. • Slides will be posted to the teaming board. ACME Worldwide Name: Ron Chewning Title: Government Business Development Consultant Phone: 407-782 3886 E-mail: [email protected] My Role in the Company is… Business Development Consultant. Evaluate opportunities and vet potential teaming partners. Our Capabilities • ACME Worldwide is a Small Disadvantaged Hispanic Owned Small Business headquartered in Albuquerque, NM with presence in Colorado Springs and Orlando. • S&T Company specializing in Motion Cueing technologies for Military and Commercial systems worldwide. • Since 1994 we’ve helped customers across the globe with unique training, technology, and simulator support services. • Our motion systems help crews in simulators train realistically and effectively for operations in the real world. • Our Gun Active Recoil (GAR®) machine gun trainers feature actual full-force recoil.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Air and Ground Conventional Forces for NATO: Mobility and Logistics Issues
    BACKGROUND PAPER U.S. Air and Ground Conventional Forces for NATO: Mobility and Logistics Issues March 1978 Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office Washington, D.C. U.S. AIR AND GROUND CONVENTIONAL FORCES FOR NATO: MOBILITY AND LOGISTICS ISSUES The Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Qovernment Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 FT II PREFACE The defense budget that the Congress will be considering in fiscal year 1979 places a strong emphasis on improving U.S. conventional forces for NATO. U.S. decisions concerning air and ground conventional forces for NATO are, however, tied closely to, and must be assessed in terms of, the capabilities of our NATO allies. This paper outlines the increasing importance of mobility and logistics in NATO defense. It compares U.S. and allied capabilities in those areas and presents options regarding U.S. decisions on logistics and mobility. The paper is part of a CBO series on the U.S. military role in NATO. Other papers in this series are U.S. Air and Ground Conventional Forces for NATO: Overview (January 1978),Assessing the NATO/Warsaw Pact Military Balance"" (December 1977), and two forthcoming, background papers, Air Defense Issues and Firepower Issues. This series was under- taken at the request of the Senate Budget Committee. In accord- ance with CBO's mandate to provide objective analysis, the study offers no recommendations. This paper was prepared by Peggy L. Weeks and Alice C. Maroni of the National Security and International Affairs Division of the Congressional Budget Office, under the supervision of John E.
    [Show full text]
  • ATLAS SUPPORTED: Strengthening U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation
    ATLAS SUPPORTED: Strengthening U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation JINSA’s Gemunder Center U.S.-Israel Security Task Force Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) May 2018 DISCLAIMER The findings and recommendations contained in this publication are solely those of the authors. Task Force and Staff Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former Commander of U.S. European Command Members General Charles Wald, USAF (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command LTG John Gardner, USA (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command Lt Gen Henry Obering, USAF (ret.) Former Director of U.S. Missile Defense Agency JINSA Gemunder Center Staff Michael Makovsky, PhD President & CEO Harry Hoshovsky Policy Analyst Jonathan Ruhe Associate Director Table of Contents Executive Summary 7 Strategic Overview 17 Growing Iranian threat to the Middle East 18 Israel’s vital role in defending mutual interests 19 New opportunities for U.S.-led regional defense 20 Recommendations 21 Elevate Israel’s official standing as an ally to that of Australia 21 Frontload the MoU to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge (QME) 26 Replenish and regionalize prepositioned munitions stockpiles in Israel 28 Drive Israeli-Arab regional security cooperation 29 Support Israel’s legitimate security needs against the Iranian threat in Syria 33 Develop new frontiers for bilateral military cooperation and R&D 35 Endnotes 37 I. Executive Summary “Beautiful,” is how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently described the relationship between the United States and Israel, two liberal democratic countries which acutely share many values and security interests. The United States recognized the State of Israel minutes after the Jewish state was established 70 years ago this month, but a bilateral strategic partnership only began several decades later during the height of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • Helicopter Gunnery Fmi-140
    gm i'W ' ©Jerenca SHEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FMI-140 s ^ I ' ¡‘io 30 9 I ü¿0 Ncxi OCTOBER 986 Îà)$A JLp HEL ORTER ERY ^«a T>° p°V* DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION. This publication contains technical or operational information that Is for official govemment'use only. Distribution is limited to US government agencies. Requests from outside the US government for release of this publication under the Freedom of Information Act or the Foreign Military Sales Program must be made to Commander, TRADOC, Fort Monroe, VA 23651-5000. \ t I I ) \ FIELD MANUAL Tc *FM 1-140 NO 1-140 HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY •JLo IWîL, Does WASHINGTON, DC, 23 OCTOBER 1986 HELICOPTER FMI-140 GUNNERY CONTENTS Page PREFACE Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1-1.\Standards in Training Commission Program. .1-1 1-2. Aviator Progression. 1-1 1-3. Training Strategy .. 1-1 1-4. Gunnery Tables 1-2 1-5. Continuation Training. 1-2 Chapter 2 BALLISTIC \ 2-1. Interior Ballisticsistii 2-1 2-2. Exterior Ballistics.Ißt! 2-1 2-3. Aerial Ballistics'!cs\. 2-2 2-4. Terminal Ballistitics 2-6 2- \. 52-7 . Dispersion Chapter 3 DELIVERY TECHNIQ ES Section I SIGHTING TECHNIQUESSNA! ND CONSIDERATIONS 3- 13-1 . Boresighting 3-2. Preflight Considerations 3-1 3-3. Special Considerations. 3-1 Section II MODES AND TYPES OF FIRE 3-4. Modes of Fire 3-3 3- 53-3 . Types of Fire Chapter 4 UNIT GUNNERY TRAINING PROGRAM Section I UNIT GUNNERY 4- 14-1 . Unit Gunnery Training Considerations 4-2. The Commander’s Assessment 4-1 4-3.
    [Show full text]
  • La Mitrailleuse Gatling…
    1861……….1911……….. Autour de la mitrailleuse Gatling….. quelques modèles d’époque. En ervice entre 1861 et 1865……….La AGAR Mitrailleuse ou canon à balles mise au point par Joseph Montigny …en 1963 Système Montigny (1869) Mitrailleuse Williams Gardner A 2 canons …1874 Mitrailleuse Nordenfelt Version à 5 canons … 1873 Début XX siècle, en Angleterre des mitrailleuses Gardner, Maxim et Nordenfelt Version Allemande de la Mitrailleuse Maxim (1880 – 1884) Elle fut l’une des mitrailleuses les plus utilisée par les Allemands pendant la première guerre mondiale Mitrailleuse Hotchkiss .. 1900 Canon Hotchskis de 37 mm, inspiré du mécanisme de la Gatling Mitrailleuse Vickers Britannique Vers 1909 ------------------------- On ne trouve pratiquement ce genre de Mitrailleuse en très bon état que dans les musées. Une Gatling, pratiquement « neuve », très belle arme d’époque en état de tir s’est vendue aux enchères par un armurier Américain autour de 335 000 dollars. (2017) Mitrailleuse Gatling Le docteur Richard Jordan Gatling, né le (12 septembre 1818 dans le comté de Hertford en Caroline du Nord, et mort le 26 février 1903 à New York, est un inventeur américain. Biographie Il est surtout connu pour la fameuse mitrailleuse Gatling, la première vraiment efficace. Il est le fils de Jordan Gatling, fermier et inventeur. Il invente à l'âge de 21 ans un nouveau mécanisme de propulsion pour les bateaux à vapeur, mais qui avait déjà été breveté par John Ericsson. Il travaille comme pêcheur, greffier, enseignant, et même magasinier. En ouvrant sa propre boutique, il inventa une semeuse à blé, et la rentabilise pour l'exploiter financièrement.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening US-Israel Strategic Cooperation
    ATLAS SUPPORTED: Strengthening U.S.-Israel Strategic Cooperation JINSA’s Gemunder Center U.S.-Israel Security Task Force Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) May 2018 DISCLAIMER This report is a product of JINSA’s Gemunder Center U.S.-Israel Security Task Force. The findings expressed herein are those solely of the Task Force. The report does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of JINSA, its founders or its board of directors. Task Force and Staff Chairman Admiral James Stavridis, USN (ret.) Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former Commander of U.S. European Command Members General Charles Wald, USAF (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command LTG John Gardner, USA (ret.) Former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command Lt Gen Henry Obering, USAF (ret.) Former Director of U.S. Missile Defense Agency JINSA Gemunder Center Staff Michael Makovsky, PhD President & CEO Harry Hoshovsky Policy Analyst Jonathan Ruhe Associate Director Table of Contents Executive Summary 7 Strategic Overview 17 Growing Iranian threat to the Middle East 18 Israel’s vital role in defending mutual interests 19 New opportunities for U.S.-led regional defense 20 Recommendations 21 Elevate Israel’s official standing as an ally to that of Australia 21 Frontload the MoU to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge (QME) 26 Replenish and regionalize prepositioned munitions stockpiles in Israel 28 Drive Israeli-Arab regional security cooperation 29 Support Israel’s legitimate security needs against the Iranian threat in Syria 33 Develop new frontiers for bilateral military cooperation and R&D 35 Endnotes 37 I. Executive Summary “Beautiful,” is how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently described the relationship between the United States and Israel, two liberal democratic countries which acutely share many values and security interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Delbarton Forum: Issue 3
    VOLUME 3 1 2 Writers in this Issue O n G u n s i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Kabbas Azhar ‘13 In this issue’s edition of “Kab- Christopher Jagoe ‘14 Instead of describing bas’ Korner,” Kabbas goes on a short rant about gun rights in the current setting, Jagoe unique- another little-known fact in the United States. ly decides to support gun rights by describing In a typical Kabbas-like manner, Kabbas pres- their founding. He notes its earliest roots, go- ents several extremely dangerous weapons that ing back as far as Justinian I, and coming full are easily attainable (if you have a large wallet). circle back to John Locke, in order to support the necessity of a society free to own guns. Jack Lynch ‘14 Harkening back to a common Kevin Conn In his article, Mr. Conn goes on theme that the public has seen since the New- a lengthy discussion surrounding most issues town shooting, Lynch attacks the NRA’s most surrounding the gun debate. Most importantly, recent philosophy surrounding gun rights. Re- he looks to the proposed “solutions” that many sponding to the group’s most recent campaign left-leaning groups hold, and shows why each of “good guys vs. bad-guys,” Lynch tries to ex- of them is either counter to that group’s beliefs, plain why such a conception is utterly false and or simply unreasonable in practice. Ultimately, unreasonable. Then, Lynch attacks the NRA Mr. Conn laments: he has no panacea to gun leadership’s stance on why we ought to hire an violence, but he does not believe that more re- armed guard to protect every school across the strictions are the solution either.
    [Show full text]
  • TABLE of CONTENTS Appendices A. D.C. Circuit Opinion, Apr. 1
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendices A. D.C. Circuit Opinion, Apr. 1, 2019 ........... A1-A97 B. Final Rule, Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. Reg. 66,514, Dec. 26, 2018 (Excerpts) ................................................... B1-B68 C. District Court for the District of Columbia Memorandum Opinion, February 25, 2019 ..................................... C1-C81 D. D.C. Circuit Judgment, Apr. 1, 2019 ......... D1-D3 E. D.C. Circuit Order dismissing appeal No. 19-5043, March 23, 2019 ...................... E1-E2 APPENDIX A 920 F.3d 1 United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Damien GUEDES, et al., Appellants v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, et al., Appellees No. 19-5042 Consolidated with 19-5044 Argued March 22, 2019 Decided April 1, 2019 Before: Henderson, Srinivasan and Millett, Circuit Judges. Opinion Opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part filed by Circuit Judge Henderson. Per Curiam: *6 In October 2017, a lone gunman armed with bump-stock-enhanced semiautomatic weapons mur- dered 58 people and wounded hundreds more in a mass shooting at a concert in Las Vegas, Nevada. In the wake of that tragedy, the Bureau of Alcohol, To- bacco, Firearms and Explosives (“Bureau”) promul- gated through formal notice-and-comment proceed- ings a rule that classifies bump-stock devices as ma- chine guns under the National Firearms Act, 26 (A1) A2 U.S.C. §§ 5801–5872. See Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. Reg. 66,514 (Dec. 26, 2018) (“Bump-Stock Rule”). The then-Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker initially signed the final Bump-Stock Rule, and Attorney General William Barr independently ratified it shortly after taking office.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Arms for Urban Combat
    Small Arms for Urban Combat This page intentionally left blank Small Arms for Urban Combat A Review of Modern Handguns, Submachine Guns, Personal Defense Weapons, Carbines, Assault Rifles, Sniper Rifles, Anti-Materiel Rifles, Machine Guns, Combat Shotguns, Grenade Launchers and Other Weapons Systems RUSSELL C. TILSTRA McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers Jefferson, North Carolina, and London LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGUING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Tilstra, Russell C., ¡968– Small arms for urban combat : a review of modern handguns, submachine guns, personal defense weapons, carbines, assault rifles, sniper rifles, anti-materiel rifles, machine guns, combat shotguns, grenade launchers and other weapons systems / Russell C. Tilstra. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-7864-6523-1 softcover : acid free paper 1. Firearms. 2. Urban warfare—Equipment and supplies. I. Title. UD380.T55 2012 623.4'4—dc23 2011046889 BRITISH LIBRARY CATALOGUING DATA ARE AVAILABLE © 2012 Russell C. Tilstra. All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Front cover design by David K. Landis (Shake It Loose Graphics) Manufactured in the United States of America McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers Box 611, Jefferson, North Carolina 28640 www.mcfarlandpub.com To my wife and children for their love and support. Thanks for putting up with me. This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations . viii Preface . 1 Introduction . 3 1. Handguns . 9 2. Submachine Guns . 33 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Reliable Intel Mission
    Reliable Intel Mission The SEALs’ missions were varied, but a booby traps and foot falls in the pitch black exfiltrated toward a predetermined extrac- typical mission included seven SEALs op- of the night. tion point. Often this involved pursuing erating as a self-contained unit. The team enemy troops, so Claymore anti-personnel With their objective in sight, be it a included a medic, an M60 machine-gunner mines, grenades, and M60 firepower were communist leader or a demolition target, (or two), a radio man, and the rest of the used to help break contact. If all else failed, the patrol carefully and silently deployed squad. Typically a South Vietnamese inter- a quick call to the Seawolves would bring to cover all approaches and visual enemy pretor joined the patrol, making eight. All in a pair of gunships to intervene and tie contacts. Enemy pickets and scouts were wore camouflaged uniforms and painted up the enemy so the SEALs could reach neutralised with silenced pistols and knives. exposed skin in earth colours to help them their extraction vehicle, usually a boat or Then, they would unleash hell so quickly blend in with the jungle. helicopter. and fiercely that sometimes twenty enemy would be dead before they could fire back INSERTION in return. RELIABLE INTEL MISSION Patrols were inserted away from their target The following mission takes you on patrol and moved in, slowly and silently, to keep EXTRACTION with a SEAL squad. You’re deep behind the element of surprise. Point men were enemy lines with a mission to complete.
    [Show full text]