Does it concern you that the EPA & FDA are stocking up on body armor?

PO2 Jeffery Marcussen Sr — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 17:58:46 -0500

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/7/golden-hammer-feds-spending-millions-to-arm-agenci/?AID=7236

does anyone besides me find this disturbing?

Golden Hammer: Feds spending millions to arm agencies that don’t need guns

As the U.S. engages in a national debate over the militarization of the police, federal data shows that government agencies charged with largely administrative roles are spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to purchase SWAT and military-style equipment.

Response by PO2 Jeffery Marcussen Sr made Jan 9 at 2016 6:01 PM

PO2 Jeffery Marcussen Sr — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:01:12 -0500

is there getting to be too many agencies that really do not need a police force of their own. there are several listed in this article that i really do not see needing a police force of their own. i could be wrong but i do feel alarmed by it.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Jan 9 at 2016 6:29 PM

LTC Yinon Weiss — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:29:39 -0500

No, it doesn't concern me, at least not in the traditional sense where I might think the EPA and FDA are now going to use those guns in inappropriate ways. However, I don't support it either, and it's probably also not a good use of taxpayer money.

There have been around 65M firearms added to the civilian population under President Obama. That's not something these agencies can compete with. Ultimately if there is a threat by the government against the population, it would likely not come from places like the EPA or FDA.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jan 9 at 2016 6:40 PM

PO1 John Miller — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:40:20 -0500

I AM concerned. Where does it stop?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 9 at 2016 7:18 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 19:18:44 -0500

I took a class that was call Federal Law Enforcement. I was blown away by how many agencies are armed. A lot of it is not what people make it out to be. A lot of them are able to obtain court orders and take legal action. The EPA can shot down sites if they are in violation of Federal Laws. If they have to serve some paper work from a judge they may send their enforcement agents that are armed. Not really a big deal. The US Mint even have their own police force. There is even armed officer for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I know these agencies are all big and scary but the ones with the badges are Cops. They are not some hit man or the bogey man.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jan 9 at 2016 8:12 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 20:12:26 -0500

I'm a bit concerned but more from the perspective of why spend my tax dollars? If there is law breaking and an administrative agency is lead, that's what DoJ , US Marshals, and FBI are for. So I'd say take all those resources away, including the people that use them and consolidate by beefing up the the Marshal and FBI side. I'm OK for now with BATF, DEA, Air Marshals, etc. being armed because they have enough business to do just in their mission set. You can't arrest federal violators without DoJ getting a warrant which can be executed through the mainstream Federal LEOs. BTW, have you heard of the Railroad Police? Interesting history and are the only State LEOs that have arrest powers beyond state lines, i.e. anywhere their Railroad property goes.

Response by PO3 Brad Phlipot made Jan 9 at 2016 8:33 PM

PO3 Brad Phlipot — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 20:33:05 -0500

Not at all. DHS has enough ammo to fight another Iraq war for 21yrs they say or shoot every American 12 times. Yea it is not uncommon to see the butcher at the local grocery store with an FDA inspector armored up and better equipped than we were. As far as the EPA I would sure as hell want body armor having that job. YES IT ALL CONCERNS ME.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 9 at 2016 9:27 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 21:27:51 -0500

Conflate the arming of these agencies with the disarming of local police, and I don't like the picture it paints.
What the hell does the FDA need body armor for?
I wonder how much of this kit was formerly police gear.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Jan 9 at 2016 9:51 PM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 21:51:50 -0500

This is my opinion and I have no facts, so take it as such. I think that POTUS has Federal Law Enforcement Agencies+ buying all the ammo and equipment to drive up the prices and demand (which it has) for these products to try and keep it out of the population. All it has done is make a lot of gun owners hoard ammo and equipment when they can get it. Why make it that .22 LR is the hardest ammo to buy? What is someone going to start an insurrection with a bunch of .22 rifles and pistols? After the current POTUS is gone, what in the hell is the Federal Government going to do with all of the BS they bought and have no need for?

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Jan 9 at 2016 11:05 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 23:05:12 -0500

Don't care because I don't fear.

Response by MCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2016 7:28 PM

MCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:28:57 -0500

First off, the "source" (OpenTheBooks.com) has been debunked as nothing more than a conspiracy theory site more times than you can count. It has less credibility than FoxNews, MSNBC, OR the National Enquirer.

Secondly, all of those agencies have security or law enforcement components (yes, the EPA has EPA cops!). They've been fighting to replace aging and worn out equipment for years - and it hasn't been until recently that they've received funding to do so. It's okay if cops get new bullet proof vests every couple of years, isn't it?

The "Milo Shoot-back System" isn't some crazy weapon - it's a shoot/don't shoot simulator, so they can learn to quickly assess threats and shoot when it's appropriate and hold fire when there is no threat. That's not a bad thing, is it?

The VA needs security at their facilities to prevent protesters and rioters from hurting employees and patients - haven't you seen the news with stories about protests outside of VA buildings? (Well, Fox didn't cover them, so maybe not) Rather than spend butt-loads of dollars on a security company to guard them and come with their own equipment, the VA is buying the equipment so they have it when contracts change out for security personnel. And did you bother to read the second page? The VA is required BY CONGRESS (that means BY LAW) to have their own police force.

As for the Smithsonian - same deal. There have been multiple shootings at or near national zoos and museums, and they want to have equipment on hand to deal with it. Since they have almost none now, the expenditure is quite high.

Same with the FDA - they aren't all bureaucrats - they have officers will full arrest and investigative authority. Do you want to send them in to a situation without the proper gear?

You may have to adjust the tightness of your tin-foil hat.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 4:41 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:41:37 -0500

In a word...no.

Here's three great reasons why I'm not worried:

1. Mostly, I this is all about DOD contractors getting more money in an era of downsizing. Congressman X gets lobbyist Y a contract, and it ends up filling the ranks of FED employees.

2. Most of this stuff is probably the result of (and people are going to hate me for this) the "I wanna" cult. I mean, I don't know how hard the training is to be an EPA Agent...but I doubt these guys are like the NSA. I can see it at the bar now, "Yeah...I'm a Federal Agent man; you better step easy!!" Some big brass wrote a memo about his guys and gals needing protection, and some politician got a feather for making it happen....all at taxpayer expense.

3. The guys who could be a force to reckon with, like FBI, HS, NSA, etc...well...c'mon, these guys all started out as us'uns. I don't see a cadre of truly patriotic American warriors deciding to throw all of that away and turn on the average citizen. If anything "good" is behind all of this, it may be that someone in DC has enough sense to know that our biggest threats right now are inside of the borders...and they may want to be sure the first line of defense has a fighting chance.

Response by SSG Michael Scott made Jan 23 at 2016 8:49 PM

SSG Michael Scott — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:49:44 -0500

Yep, sounds fishy to me.