worth another look in today's climate

Discussion in 'The Club House' started by Nmwabbit, Jun 5, 2020.

  1. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    888
    483
    63
    back in 2015 i was completely taken back with this article regarding the unbelievable number of federal governmental law enforcement agencies...quoted in part for your purview:

    Currently there are 73 federal agencies that have full-time armed officers with arresting authority. According to a 2008 report by the Department of Justice, there were 120,000 full-time law enforcement officers working for federal agencies and 24 different federal agencies employed at least 250 full-time officers. Federal agencies with at least 250 full-time officers included the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Mint, U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Veterans Health Administration.

    These federal enforcement officers are authorized to carry weapons and make arrests from Section 812 of the 2002 Homeland Security Act. This law authorizes the Offices of the Inspector General within each federal agency, which traditionally look for fraud and waste within the agency, to have officers that carry firearms, seek and execute warrants for arrests and makes arrests without a warrant while engaged in official duties.

    please review and think about why there are 73 federal agencies with police powers including arrest.

    opps forgot the cite: https://www.freedomworks.org/content/obama’s-private-army-militarizing-federal-agencies
     
    schnuffleupagus, alsaqr and Gatoragn like this.
  2. JimRau

    JimRau Well-Known Member Supporter

    7,286
    3,343
    113
    If you think this is a 'problem', what is your solution????????
     

  3. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    888
    483
    63
    surely you didn't just ask that...

    as stated in the article..which is obvious you didn't read!

    Last year, Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) sponsored the Regulatory Agency Demilitarization Act, which would have removed arresting authority from agencies not traditionally authorized to carry weapons or make arrests.
     
  4. JimRau

    JimRau Well-Known Member Supporter

    7,286
    3,343
    113
    They should be made to justify that authority. On that we agree. But in the world today, even if they do not have arrest powers, they should be allowed to be armed for there own SD.
     
  5. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    888
    483
    63
    right...so the blue brotherhood can enforce their will on citizens?
     
  6. sheepdawg

    sheepdawg Well-Known Member Supporter

    3,340
    8,674
    113
    Hasn't our government been full of useless bureaucracies for years? Don't the children and relatives of government big shots deserve cushy jobs at the taxpayers expense? What surprised me is the power of Game Wardens here in Tennessee. The Tennessee Game Warden is the most powerful LEO in the state. Good thing I'm buddies with one of the high ups. He'd bust me in a heartbeat if he caught me engaged in no good though but he did give me a bunch of 40S&W a while back.
     
    ellis36 likes this.
  7. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    888
    483
    63
    alas those are state level...when the US Dept of Education has goonies w/guns & arrest powers for what...herd up defaulting student loan violators?
     
    alsaqr likes this.
  8. sheepdawg

    sheepdawg Well-Known Member Supporter

    3,340
    8,674
    113
    I wouldn't put it past them.
     
  9. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member

    578
    811
    93
    I'd be much happier if arrest powers were confined to sheriff's departments, for example, and that any "fed" actions involving the forcible detaining and arresting of people in a town involve the staff hired in that place to protect and defend those people. If for no other reason that a moderate "check and balance" to guard against abuse and to ensure the local LE is part of the oversight. Yes, a bit of "red tape" dictating how things would go, but it could help ensure such things would occur by the will of the people, instead of "from on high."

    Would have to think through a solution that could be workable. But I suspect 73+ different agencies with arrest powers isn't what we all imagined back when such things were proposed. IMO we need to get back to a slightly simpler approach, more straightforward in the responsibilities for arrest powers and more cognizant of the "checks and balances" aspect to guard against abuses.
     
  10. Gatoragn

    Gatoragn Well-Known Member Supporter

    7,401
    5,787
    113
    Communists, Socialists, National Socialists all love armed government agencies.
     
    AgedWarrior likes this.
  11. AgedWarrior

    AgedWarrior Active Member

    138
    206
    43
    I believe this is the problem our nations founders foresaw, and is the primary reason behind the 2nd. Amendment.
     
    primer1, 7.62 Man and oO_Rogue_Oo like this.
  12. oO_Rogue_Oo

    oO_Rogue_Oo Well-Known Member

    915
    845
    93
    Being in favor of any citizen being or at least having the option of being armed; why would I not be in favor of government employees being armed?

    Communists, Socialists, National Socialists aren't just in favor of agencies being armed they are in favor of a disparity of force. They want US unarmed.
     
    Gatoragn and AgedWarrior like this.
  13. 7.62 Man

    7.62 Man Well-Known Member

    1,068
    268
    83
    Every citizen should have the right/duty to arrest someone seen doing something wrong if no law enforcement is present. We should be taught how to do it right, we should have the right to carry arms to facilitate accomplishing that job.
     
  14. RJF22553

    RJF22553 Well-Known Member

    3,546
    5,432
    113
    I'm not as alarmed as I might possibly should be about the agencies with weapons. Agencies such as the National Park Service or the ATF, or even the IRS have some bona-fide requirements for some of the agents to carry: if not for operational missions but for protection of the offices and the employees.

    Recent events sort of justify that.
     
    alsaqr likes this.
  15. microadventure

    microadventure Well-Known Member

    2,175
    2,982
    113
    I have to wonder how many felons you have met. every one I ever met was delusional as a democrat, as full of themselves as a porta potty at a music festival, and dangerous due entirely to phenomenal stupidity.

    then you have the psycho chick lying about the guy who dumped her, and the macho man who thinks he's going to get some if he jumps the guy the psycho chick fingered. yeah, personal experience.
     
    7.62 Man likes this.
  16. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    888
    483
    63
    g66enigma, et al.,

    "...called the “constitutional sheriff” movement, and as it grows, it’s increasing the risk of conflict between local law enforcement and federal authorities. Its animating idea is that a sheriff holds ultimate law-enforcement authority in his county—outranking even the federal government within its borders. Though the movement claims deep history in English law, its real roots lie in the more recent fringes of American right-wing thought. And its popularity helps explain why Arpaio’s defiance of federal law shouldn’t be seen as just one grandstanding sheriff crossing a line, but instead should be seen as part of a broader grassroots resistance to constitutional and cultural upheavals during the 20th century."

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/09/01/joe-arpaio-pardon-sheriffs-movement-215566