They may be familiar to some, but not every gunsmith knows the ins and outs of drill bits. Here are the basics.

The graceful, light, and distinctive L.C. Smith Hammerless Double sidelock is a favorite of American shotgunners. Here’s how to fix its most common problems. If you own a Smith and want to make it suitable to shoot again, or if you are presented a Smith to repair, here’s what you need to know about the shotgun.

In June 2010, Kahr Arms purchased Minnesota-based firearms manufacturer, Magnum Research, Inc., maker of the Desert Eagle Pistol and BFR Revolvers in .44 Magnum, .45 LC/.410 or .45/70. Kahr Arms offers a selection of other niche-type firearms, such as the “Tommy Gun” and Auto-Ordnance line of M1 .30 caliber carbines. In this video, Gun Tests Contributing Editor Roger Eckstine shows off two of the company’s big-hole BFR wheelguns.

Beretta USA introduced the BU-9 Nano as its entry into the pocket 9mm pistol category last September. Initial shipments of the American-made pistol left the Accokeek, Maryland factory beginning in November 2011, with a suggested retail price of $475. In this video, Gun Tests’ Contributing Editor Roger Eckstine gets a detailed explanation of how easy the Nano is to break down for maintenance. The Nano's modularity provides for simple disassembly and easy cleaning. Safely disassemble the pistol by first engaging the striker deactivator, a patent pending safety mechanism that eliminates the need to pull the trigger prior to disassembly.

Gun Reports - News

The original GunReports.com story appeared in August.

Gun Owners Worry that Big HSA Ammo Order Will Be Used on Them

WASHINGTON, D.C.--An innocuous story posted on GunReports.com on August 22 wound up on dozens of websites and YouTube videos last week as hundreds of gunowners publicly worried that the U.S. Government was planning to use 200 million rounds of 40-caliber ammunition to subdue its citizens.

The original GunReports.com story post was headlined, "Winchester to Deliver 200 Million 40-Cal. Rounds to Homeland Security." Here's the link.

"We began noticing unusual traffic on the site on Dec. 12," said GunReports.com's Sales Manager Gene Taylor. "So I asked content wizard Scott Freigh to track down what was happening."

Subsequent Google searches led back to a series of 827 re-posts at places as varied as pro-liberty websites to YouTube and Fox News St. Louis. Almost all cited the Winchester story as a worrisome development.

Taylor said the earliest link to the GunReports story was on LiveFreeRadio.net in a Dec. 10 post. The link appeared under the headline 'Police State News.'

The next day, a YouTube video post for the "Voice of Alex Jones" web-tv program scrolled the GunReports.com page, while the announcer asked, "What do you make of that? What do you guys think of that?"

In the sidebar to the "Jones" video post, this question appeared: "What in the world are they getting ready for?"

Apparently, the Jones viewers worried that the DHS rounds would be used domestically.

"Teotwawki100" wrote under the Jones video: "Clicky-clack. Lock and load, dudes. It's coming."

The Jones poster "Britishempires" wrote, "That equals 200 million dead sheep."

In the GunReports.com comments section, the same worries bubbled up:

"Bigdumbguy" posted, "I can waste as much as 1000 rounds a day just plinking. There may be a plan to actually hire border patrol personnel in the near future, making sure they have ammo stored is not exactly a bad thing. But which way will it be aimed is my question. It's getting pretty bad here."

"OPossumTX" had this: "I believe the U.S. government is preparing for an 'insurgency' and armed conflict within the borders of the country. Thus all of the mutual aid agreements with other countries and 4 Million Rounds of .40 S&W."

But poster "mark98115" offered a competing view: "Talk about paranoid. Some people here need to get a grip. First the story specifies maximum of 200 million over the next 5 years. This does not mean 200 per year. It means 6 million per year [sic]. Most likely the government is locking in a price on their purchase of ammo for the next 5 years, but there is not enough detail in the story. If this is like most contracts, then there might be a fixed price for those 5 years or a price structure that allows for only a certain percentage in price increases. ... Now get a grip and concentrate on what is the real threat posed by any of these clowns in elected office."

Taylor said, "Obviously, a lot of patriotic, sincere, conservative people are worried that the federal government's growing power and arrogance will lead to suppression of their rights--the spree buying earlier this year is another obvious indication of this concern.

"At GunReports.com, we'll continue to cover developments and give voice to both sides of the story."

A call Monday to the Department of Homeland Security Public Affairs office in Washington wasn't immediately returned.

Reader Comments

It sounds like a normal contractual purchase by druncle Barry.

Comment by: Mark G | December 22, 2009

Everyone seems to have forgotten another campaign promise of Obama. We will have a civilian police force as large or larger than the Army to care for the public. Hmmmm. Can anyone spell gestopo?

Comment by: dgray64 | December 24, 2009

when Japan invaded Pearl Harbor they did not come into the Country further b/c U.S. citizens were armed. We are still America and forever we will be. B/C we are in the "informational age" we can get information around faster. This current administration in Washington has been exposed with the dirt that has always been there. We should always be prepared as a minute man as our "GREY HAIRED FATHERS WERE" or are referred to by this administration. We have the VOTING POWER TO VOTE THEM OUT, and now they are scared we will elect to vote them out, and we will vote them out in 2010; first to go is in Mass. to make 59 Democrats. I would recommend to be prepared as a "boy scout" be peaceful and non-threatening and pass onto everyone to "VOTE THEM OUT" and finally pursue Criminal Charges against them for the dirt and corruption. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!

Comment by: not applicable | December 24, 2009

when Japan invaded Pearl Harbor they did not come into the Country further b/c U.S. citizens were armed. We are still America and forever we will be. B/C we are in the "informational age" we can get information around faster. This current administration in Washington has been exposed with the dirt that has always been there. We should always be prepared as a minute man as our "GREY HAIRED FATHERS WERE" or are referred to by this administration. We have the VOTING POWER TO VOTE THEM OUT, and now they are scared we will elect to vote them out, and we will vote them out in 2010; first to go is in Mass. to make 59 Democrats. I would recommend to be prepared as a "boy scout" be peaceful and non-threatening and pass onto everyone to "VOTE THEM OUT" and finally pursue Criminal Charges against them for the dirt and corruption. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!

Comment by: not applicable | December 24, 2009

I believe this says it all. From Barack Obama. "We cannot continue to rely only on our military to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just powerful, just as strong and just as well funded" Now couple that with:

“A democracy is always temporary in nature and simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse, due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. I would also be prepared as "a boy scout" Merry Christmas!

Comment by: 3percent | December 24, 2009

Although Napolitano does run a scary ship, 200 million rounds for an agency that has as many LE assets as DHS is reasonable amount. Consider...US Coast Guard, 42,000, US Secret Service, 4400, US Border Patrol 20,000, ICE 14000, and the Air Marshals, whose numbers are classified. This works out to less than 2400 rounds per officer per year...a considerable number, but basically within the average budgeted in any LE agency for training and qualifications of its personnel.

Comment by: bdtcop | December 24, 2009

3percent - is your second paragraph (democracy temporary in nature) a quote? If so, do you know where it is from?

Thanks!

Comment by: P V B | December 24, 2009

Is it a continuation of the Obama Administration to deprive the US citizen from getting ammunition. My distributors claim they don't have ammunition to send me to sell in my shop. Are they are telling me the truth or only shipping what is available to the larger gun stores? Wal-Mart doesn't get that much ammo. So where's it going? Consumer hoarding can't be a problem because none of my competitors have any ammo either.

Comment by: SASfixer | December 24, 2009

I tried to submit a more thorough post - apparently it was too long.

My main point is that if you break down 40 million per year into a reasonable proficiency allocation per agent, you don't have enough ammo to train the agents we already have AND stockpile for domestic house-clearing operations. Keep in mind a point many of us say when the argument at hand is CCW - most of us shoot far more regularly than is typically required of LE officers by department mandate.

Also, if you buy the conspiracy theories surrounding the current ammo shortfall, you must assume that many different government agencies are cooperating - something they typically fail to do very well. It's simply supply and demand right now as new shooters come aboard and old shooters build up there supplies.

Comment by: P V B | December 24, 2009

All talk of reasonableness is nice, but most of our military are armed with 9mm. Are all these other agencies armed with .40? That would be worth some research.

Comment by: dgray64 | December 24, 2009

P V B,

The quote is from Alexander Tyler a Scottish professor 1787. I should have included that. I'm sure the large ammo purchase is legitimate and above board, besides, if you're expecting trouble you bring a rifle or shotgun. Anyway, speaking of conspiracy, anybody remember a story here about a large purchase of special penetrating 5.56 ammo for an undisclosed D.O.D. civilian organization? That statement by Obama about a civilian national security force bothers me and evidentally a lot of others. We already have the police and the national guard.

Comment by: 3percent | December 24, 2009

dgray - trying to pin down who carries what firearms can be a daunting task anymore, but the .40 S&W's popularity is clearly rising. Remember, this contract was for Homeland Security. My recall isn't that great, but I know I have seen a lot of press releases about various .40's being adopted at varying LE levels around the country. If they really were going to stockpile, the contract would probably be kept as secret as possible.

Besides, like 3percent says below, if you are expecting trouble, you are carrying more than a pistol. Likewise, the military's sidearms are essentially irrelevant as any fighter carrying a pistol uses something else as their primary means to cause death and destruction.

3percent - I really wish we would see more "investigative reporting" on Obama's national police force statement....

Comment by: P V B | December 24, 2009

The contract is for 135 grain hollow point ammo fort use solely by Customs & Border Protection. This bullet is lighter in weight and loaded to lower pressures than the standard DHS .40 caliber round. Why? It's easier for the Customs inspectors to qualify with!

There's an old story about a sheriff in a small town attending a town party. One older lady, noticing that the sheriff is wearing his sidearm, points to the gun and asks "Expecting trouble, Sheriff?" The sheriff replied "No ma'am, if I was expecting trouble I'd have brought my rifle."

The moral of the story? If you know you're going to a gun fight you bring a rifle and some armed friends.

So, if DHS was expecting real trouble, they would order 300 million rounds of 5.56mm NATO and 150 million rounds of 7.62mm NATO, not a bunch of handgun ammo. Think about it.

Comment by: the mist | December 24, 2009

I am pleased to see so many objective commments from the readers and owners of firearms. Do not allow fear to control you with this administration. Use your brain at the voting pole, and "vote 'em out", and we will have fairness back!

Comment by: not applicable | December 24, 2009

Ditto from me on the above comments by everyone. The liberals would have never got back in power if the Republicans had actually done anything for the American people. If Dr. Ron Paul were president I don't think we would need to be discussing any of this.Happy holidays to everyone and 2010 should be better after the November elections.

Comment by: watasi | December 24, 2009

I believe this is a paraphrase of Aristotle: "...every democracy will finally collapse, due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

“Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.” - Aristotle

But Aristotle also said: “You will never do anything in this world without courage. It is the greatest quality of the mind next to honor.”

I like the axiom that says: Just because you have a gun, it doesn't mean that you're armed. Unfortunately, when it comes to voting, a corollary of that axiom is also true: Just because you have a gun and the right to vote, it doesn't mean that you vote your gun rights. Too many gun owners are just casual hobbyists or once-a-year hunters, and couldn't really care less about their gun rights. So, the comments by "not applicable" and 3percent are gems of wisdom, but it's my opinion that even if it's now too late for the ballot box because of voter apathy, and even if Aristotle is right and we are irrevocably headed for despotism, we must still act as if the soap box and the ballot box were not lost to us, and continue to engage in politics bravely and honorably right up to the instant the command is given: "Open fire!"

Gaviota

Comment by: Lee W | December 24, 2009

There were attempts at "investigative reporting" by Joseph Farah, a journalist for the World Net Daily. They don't seem to want to talk about it. I haven't been able to find the article on the large purchase of special penetrating with expanding capability 5.56 by a D.O.D. entity other than the military. Now what do you suppose that could be for?

Comment by: 3percent | December 24, 2009

3percent - I can think of many sinister reasons why a non-military entity of our government might need such ammunition, but I also find it believable that "they" need to keep pace with the criminal element in our society.

Comment by: P V B | December 24, 2009

Gaviota, I like that! PVB, good point but the criminal element is not armed nearly as well as most of us "firearms enthusiasts" So called asssault weapons are used in less than 2% of crimes.

Comment by: 3percent | December 24, 2009

Gentlemen (and Ladies), always remember that throughout this effort, Barac the First does not want our guns, he's too smart for that attack. It his hencemen (aka Cabinet Officers) that want both the guns and the ammunition and those are the ones to keep tabs on. Always, always remember, its not about gun control or ammunition control, ITS ABOUT CONTROL!!! With that said, Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night. May God Bless us every one!

Comment by: MasterGuide | December 24, 2009

Hey, we can have some fun with this, explore the possibilities, get some different points of view from like minded people. I think the best advice is expect the best but prepare for the worst. Merry Christmas everybody

Comment by: 3percent | December 24, 2009

Well said everybody!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

Comment by: P V B | December 24, 2009

Try and remember that if this Gov. ever turns it guns on the people,It wil be our kids,and our family holding the guns. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!

Comment by: Michael K G | December 24, 2009

Michael KG what does that mean? Holding the guns on what side? I didn't raise my kids to defy the constitution or any amendments. Would your kids take guns away from Americans? What are you saying?

Comment by: 3percent | December 25, 2009

Oh, please give up the fantasy guys. Holding out in some compound, shooting back at the "government agents" arriving to collect your firearms. You sound like a bunch of loons. I hate to break it to you but guns are unlikely to ever soon be confiscated: too messy. The leftist have time on their side. Decrease the number of hunters, collectors and target shooters (through onerous regulation and range closures), divide and conquer. Incrementally and slowly ban, tax and encumber selected "bad" guns every couple of years..raise the cost of gun sellers by requiring oppressive insurance, licensing, tax and zoning regulations until all profit is removed, etc. Ultimately what will happen is the cost and trouble of gun ownership will have gun ownership slip into an irrelevant minority politically, particularly with our later generations. Ultimately, the governments will have huge estate prohibitions on firearm transfers, requiring enourmous taxes as a condition of passing firearms to family members. Faced with cash or Dad's rifle, surviving family will take the cash. Eventually, they'll just pull a Great Britain or Australia after firearms become less a part of American life. But we are talking a generation or two from now. So instead of fantasizing about taking on the local agents of Obama, you should be agressively recruiting new shooters, getting our kids off the computer and into the woods and range, and tolerate no creeping gun control "reasonable restrictions" at any time.

Comment by: Squirmydad | December 25, 2009

Richard V. you are entirely correct. It seems all the people want to blame Obama and the Democrats,but the largest spying(on our own citizens) bill in history was brought by the Republicans. We can't really trust any of them once in office they all get the what's in it for me and how much you willing to pay mentality. I too have taken all my kids nephews and niece's and any of my kid's friends out shooting to teach them about guns and the safety they demand. I would suggest some folks watch Jesse Ventura's conspiracy theory it's been an EYE OPENER from a guy who tells it like it is period.

Comment by: pitdogg | December 25, 2009

You mean it won't be like in the movies? Passing my weapon to the next person with my dying breath? Now I've got to write a new scrip. Seriously, read the latest NRA magazine article about the CDC's study showing you're 4.5 times more likely to be shot if you have a gun. The study is a complete farce and paid for with our tax dollars. It puTs guns in the category of a disease. This is the kind of thing RICHARD V is talking about. No they won't come for our guns head on. I know this is overused but you don't put a frog in boiling water, put him in cool water and gradually heat it up so he doesn't know what's happening to him.

Comment by: 3percent | December 25, 2009

"It seems all the people want to blame Obama and the Democrats..."

Pitdogg, you haven't been reading gun literature long enough. Every Congress in every session since 1968 has had anti-gun laws proposed and introduced. Few of them have ever been voted on, and even fewer enacted, thanks to the efforts of gun-owners everywhere, and the numerous gun organizations. I've opposed anti-gun legislation which was supported by Richard Nixon in 1972. I opposed Ronald Reagan's anti-gun provisions in the badly misnamed 1986 "Gun Owners Protection Act." I opposed all the anti-gun legislation proposed by Congress under Ford, Carter, Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, and now Obama. It doesn't matter who's president, the fight goes on. And on, and on, and on...

"...but the largest spying(on our own citizens) bill in history was brought by the Republicans."

So what? Who cares? Learn this, my friend: All politicians compromise. Some are willing to compromise more than others. All politicians have to be watched, scrutinized, and publicly held to account if they violate the public trust. We point the finger at Democrats when they're in power, and we point the finger at Republicans when they are in power. Complaining that Democrats are being unfairly criticized because the Republicans do bad stuff too is a toddler's whine, not an adult comparison. Stop being loyal to individuals and parties, and start being loyal to the Constitution, and the liberties and freedoms of your fellow citizens.

And in my humble opinion, Jesse Ventura is a self-promoting, egomaniacal whackjob. I just can't bring myself to take anything he says seriously. Sorry.

Gaviota

Comment by: Lee W | December 25, 2009

Richard V:

"I hate to break it to you but guns are unlikely to ever soon be confiscated: too messy."

Like the "government agents" who didn't confiscate legally registered semi-automatic sport utility rifles in California in 1999 after simply declaring them to be illegal assault weapons? Or the same "government agents" who didn't confiscate suddenly illegal rifles in New York state in 1992? Or the "government agents" who didn't confiscate every gun they could find in New Orleans after Katrina? Or the "government agents" who didn't break into evacuated homes and steal guns in Greensburg, KS after the 2007 tornado? Not to mention those phantom "government agents" in Waco, TX and Ruby Ridge, ID.

Hmm. I think I'll go with demonstrated history over your accusations of my loony fantasies. Like a lot of people, I'm ready for a large number of possible adverse events. None of them are fantasies. I respectfully recommend the same for every good citizen.

Gaviota

Comment by: Lee W | December 25, 2009

Gaviota...I am well versed in all the the anti- gun efforts. I am a life member to the NRA and have been a member since i was 12.

Complaining that Democrats are being unfairly criticized because the Republicans do bad stuff too is a toddler's whine, not an adult comparison.

well i think you missed my point and that was most are very short sighted on memory. My point was that we need to watch BOTH. We are being screwed from the left and the right!! Buddy I have voted for both parties that were pro gun. As a matter of fact one of our very own Democrat's from Illinois who the NRA asked that we support was elected to congress. We will be voting her out in the next election because NOW she's ANTI-GUN!!

And in my humble opinion, Jesse Ventura is a self-promoting, egomaniacal whackjob. I just can't bring myself to take anything he says seriously. Sorry.

I doubt that any whackjob has ever made the SEAL team's most are pretty stable minded I watch his show with a open mind and he's been able to get into and ask the questions that need to be asked because of the respect he has earned from the Seal's and his time as governor. I know more than a few Police officers and military personal who will be walking off the job and taking their weapons with them should it come down to mass confiscation and my friend IT WILL BE MESSY. If the government was going to go against it's own I do not think they would publicize it when there is many more places overseas they could buy their ammo from under the radar just my 2cents

Comment by: pitdogg | December 25, 2009

Gaviota...I am well versed in all the the anti- gun efforts. I am a life member to the NRA and have been a member since i was 12.

Complaining that Democrats are being unfairly criticized because the Republicans do bad stuff too is a toddler's whine, not an adult comparison.

well i think you missed my point and that was most are very short sighted on memory. My point was that we need to watch BOTH. We are being screwed from the left and the right!! Buddy I have voted for both parties that were pro gun. As a matter of fact one of our very own Democrat's from Illinois who the NRA asked that we support was elected to congress. We will be voting her out in the next election because NOW she's ANTI-GUN!!

And in my humble opinion, Jesse Ventura is a self-promoting, egomaniacal whackjob. I just can't bring myself to take anything he says seriously. Sorry.

I doubt that any whackjob has ever made the SEAL team's most are pretty stable minded I watch his show with a open mind and he's been able to get into and ask the questions that need to be asked because of the respect he has earned from the Seal's and his time as governor. I know more than a few Police officers and military personal who will be walking off the job and taking their weapons with them should it come down to mass confiscation and my friend IT WILL BE MESSY. If the government was going to go against it's own I do not think they would publicize it when there is many more places overseas they could buy their ammo from under the radar just my 2cents

Comment by: pitdogg | December 25, 2009

pitdogg - as far as Jesse goes, we won't all agree....

As a former Jarhead who has served with many SEALs and other elite operators, people who are willing to do things like jump out of an airplane at 30,000 feet and land on an oil platform in the middle of hostile seas at night are not what most people would consider "normal" or sane. Whackjob may be a bit harsh, but the man is certainly a self-promoter with an uncommonly high ego drive in my opinion.

Comment by: P V B | December 25, 2009

Lee, bro, when your bunker cools off enough to snap you out of your hot fantasy, recognize that your moronic ranting on this board about you shooting it out against the gun taking federal'es will likely mean that they will visit you first, snatch you off the street when you're daydreaming about quick battle mag changes with your tricked out AR(....they have your id, they have your position in writing on these boards). Your arms will be molten aluminum ingots before anyones elses. BWaahahahahahah!

Comment by: Squirmydad | December 26, 2009

Bunker. Fantasy. Moronic. Ranting. Daydreaming. Okay, well, thanks for the warning, Richard V. I appreciate the depth of your understanding and the sober good judgement of your opinions. Have a good life.

Pitdogg - Forgive me, brother, I did indeed miss your perfectly valid point. Sorry 'bout that. I thought I was re-reading one of the posts by a guy who keeps insisting that liberals aren't anti-gun, and I went astray. As you probably know, I get my tinsel in a twist when people go off blaming Dems for this or Repubs for that, without understanding that there are no longer any significant differences between the two, that both of them are to blame for the mess we're in. Sorry again for my mixup.

As for Jesse Ventura, maybe I'M the whackjob. Richard V certainly seems to think so. For all I know, he may be the genius with the plan that will fix everything, but I still can't listen to him. He just makes what little hair I have left stand up on end.

Gaviota

Comment by: Lee W | December 26, 2009

Taking our guns is as plausible as taking our cars. The economy depends on these and many other material items to flourish. The regs. before Congress only address the actual ownership of guns. Why not address the penalties for commiting a crime WITH a gun?. They throw the criminals out of the jails for lack of room while trying to make us "Criminals" for simply owning the guns in the first place. What makes anyone think they have room for even more criminals by their definition? The government, and specifically this current administration, is a GIANT DOG CHASING IT"S OWN TAIL!. period

Comment by: Sharps | December 31, 2009

BTW PVB There is no such thing as a former Jarhead! Once a Marine........ Semper Fi

Comment by: Sharps | December 31, 2009

I've heard "taking our guns is as plausible as taking our cars" before. It follows that "you register your cars so why not register your guns?" How many of our representatives want to take our cars, or just the ones with mag wheels or spoilers or racing strips? Nobody "needs" that kind of thing. We just need some "common sense" restrictions. Did they take guns or cars in New Orleans? Did they take registered cars or so called assault weapons in California? How about Britain, Australia etc, etc? Addressing penalties for gun crimes is a good start. We need tougher judges, who give serious penalties. It doesn't include a certain "wise Latina" who doesn't believe in self defense either but it's not coincidence she was appointed. As far as this governmment chasing it's own tail? Don't kid yourself, they know exactly what they're doing and Obama is nothing but a smooth talking, monitor reading front man. Cheer up! The worst is yet to come.

Comment by: 3percent | January 1, 2010

I'm afraid that 3percent is right. There is a plan in the works, a plan that might have been let slip during the campaign, but that is hush, hush now. The dems have their health care program now, though the majority of Americans don't want it. They care nothing about the Constitution. They have no business experience, they just want us dependent on government and unarmed. Watch them sneak in some under the rug rules or laws...

Comment by: dgray64 | January 1, 2010

Dgray64 is right about the hush hush policy. During Obama's campaign Tom Gresham's "gun talk" had a number of callers who commented on the Obama gun control agenda they had put online. As more and more people called in the site was taken down. This was done within a few hours. By the way, I recently found that OBAMA is an acronym for One Big A** Mistake America!

Comment by: 3percent | January 1, 2010

I wish I could send out a copy of Aaron Russo's great documentary named "Freedom To Fascism" to everyone on this board. It is available on Google video for free, but many people still have never heard of it.

The line at the end of the movie goes like this: "Stop being good Democrats. Stop being good Republicans. Start being good Americans."

Comment by: RackEmPunk | January 11, 2010

"But poster "mark98115" offered a competing view: "Talk about paranoid. Some people here need to get a grip. First the story specifies maximum of 200 million over the next 5 years. This does not mean 200 per year. It means 6 million per year [sic]."

Am I missing something? Doesn't 200 million over 5 years equal 40 million and not 6 million? Just curious what kind of math he was using...

Comment by: tigwelder56 | February 25, 2010