I also bought mine from a local shop. The guy at the shop told me Remington produced it for a contract they were bidding on and didn't get. What I'd like to know is it any different than the regular off the shelf stuff.
Picked some up at a local shop last year. Owner claimed that he'd asked Remington about it and was told that it was a standard GS but with low-flash powder that they use on government contracts. Nothing special beyond that.
The Bonded ones clearly say BONDED on the package, and FWIW I think we should go start lynching random Remington employees until they stop that sell-only-to-LE crap. Winchester, too, for that matter...
I bought a couple of boxes of GS “Government” and compared them with the regular Golden Sabers. No “performance” testing, I just wanted to see if they shot different… they do. The recoil felt softer and they shot to a different point of aim in all of my 1911s (compared to the regular stuff). FWIW
The sell to LEO only, is strictly a liability thing.
Many departments sign agreements, that release the ammunition companies/suppliers from any responsibility if the weapons the ammunition is used in fail, because of the use of the specified loading they contracted.
The government and police forces/agencies are not overly concerned with increased wear on the weapons issued or reduced parts/weapon life, they are more interested in the terminal performance of the round and that it meets other criteria (flash signature, velocity, enviromental resistance,shelf life) and given that the ammunition will be used in quality weapons, there is little concern that they will fail and another given is that the weapons will see regular inspection and maintenance by experienced armourers.
So, if you want to go lynch someone, start with the lawyers and careless people, who started this endless stream of liabilty, not those who are merely following what the lawyers and management lay down, so as to keep thier employer in business.
In some cases I'm sure that's true but you KNOW darn good and well that the Ranger Talon's LEO status, at least, has nothing to do with liability and everything to do with it being the Black Talon without the black paint. That's all Remington (and the media, but Remington didn't HAVE to cave in under the pressure)
I think that "LEO only" policies are utter nonsense. If a load meets SAAMI specs, its fine for everyone to use. If it didn't meet SAAMI specs, one can be assured it wouldn't be marketed to LEOs because they use the same handguns that are available to us mere civilians. Also, the incremental differences between many "LEO only" loads and certain other loads available to anyone are often very small in practical terms. I think that it is more about marketing than anything else. Tell the LEO purchasers that no one else will be able to purchase a particular load, and they just seem to like that element of "exclusivity".