• #105
    Do NOT blame the cattle.
    None of the bovine revolt occurred before that disrespectful cow tipping craze!
  • #142
    @craythegray Man, if i worked for the Department of Education I'd carry a bazooka to handle some of those "little" monsters. Knew a few teachers that weren't all there also.

    The FDA has been conducting raids on warehouses involving pharmaceuticals for over twenty years that I know of and personally, I think this agency has displayed more criminal behavior than many of the people whose warehouses they have raided. These people are nothing more than mob enforcers for the pharmaceutical industry and that branch of "standard" ( American folk medicine ) medicine that's still controlled by the AMA.
  • R Load more replies

  • #24
    You should do more than worry. Government Marketing Poster - "We are the government. We are hear to help you."

    Actual - "We are the government. We are here to STOP you."
  • #45
    @Firestorm - I believe it's spelled 'here', not 'hear'. I do have one question though. What happened to the 'gun rights' folks argument that "more guns makes us safer?"

    So when untrained 'citizens' are armed to the teeth, that's not a problem, but as bsking put it (post 5) when 'former paper pushers' are, it is. Hey, in between raids for unregulated cow's milk, they might just encounter a guy holding up a 7-11. Remember. More guns = Safety. LOL!
  • #75
    "Social Security has gotten guns too, I'm worried it's like when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail."

    Interesting.....not worried enough to be for gun control on regular citizens though right?
  • R Load more replies

  • #81
    can't change my vote...I support legislation getting rid of guns from most federal agencies. I would support getting rid of most federal agencies as well.
  • #5
    I absolutely supported it's ridiculous to have these former paper pushers rurunning around armed to the teeth making mistakes that cost people's lives and livelihood the Department of Education has a SWAT team really where are they during all the mass shootings? these idiots wanna play army man let him get a paintball gun and go on the weekend.

    I hope this guy is successful sounds like he's got a good head on his shoulders.
  • #6
    I guess the alternative is we disarm them and then they call local law enforcement to accompany during potentially dangerous scenarios...either way guys with guns are showing up. :-/
  • #14
    I'd much rather have local law enforcement showing up with guns than anonymous, unaccountable federal agents. Local law enforcement has a much better knowledge of the people involved.
  • #15
    @Food4thoughts I don't even like the idea of some of these smaller sheriffs departments having an automatic weapons in armored personnel vehicles with gun turrets. I read over the weekend of a sheriff's deputy being arrested at a Walmart for shoplifting....and another police officer in Norfolk being arrested on suspicion of indecent liberties with an minor child....I'm just a little uneasy with people of that caliber having those toys
  • #18
    Maybe, but I guess the premise still stands someone with a gun is showing up. I'm not sure on whether they should or not be armed. But in this day and age where there is a substantial population of people with guns who hate the government in all capacities...if I were working with the public in an official capacity, especially one that doles out monetary penalties, I'd want a gun and probably a vest too.
  • R Load more replies

  • #28
    The traditional law enforcement agencies can handle any issues for the other agencies when needed. The current system just makes more jobs for would be Rambos. Not only should most of these agencies NOT have armed agents, but all the weapons they have purchased should be confiscated and sold or transferred to legitimate LE agencies, or destroyed. Each agency should have to submit a document which justifies and defines why they need arms. IMO, most can't justify their need.
  • #56
    The simplest answer I can come up with is that government Knows it is becoming more and more intrusive and the populist is starting to challenge the needs for these intrusions. Government has overstepped it's bounds and they are concerned that their abusive authority might be in jeopardy. It is time to reduce the size of the federal government and to revoke some of their unjust powers.
  • #7
    it's more likely so they can raid someones farm keep the family in handcuffs in the house while the rest of the team goes out and shoot a couple a cows for the company picnic
  • R Load more replies

  • #32
    All Tyrants love having their own armed (political) "SS." Every agency under Obama have swat teams, from the BLM to the Dept. of Education. Not to mention armored vehicles for HLS.....Why??

    Currently, the only thing standing in his way of full control is the 2nd Amendment.

    A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.(middle class)
    -- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

    Get the picture?
  • #108
    Right now we’re facing an all-out assault on our gun rights--

    Gun bans, gun registration, legislation, court cases, the U.N. global gun ban treaty, Obama’s executive orders, and a hostile, freedom-hating media…
    The attacks are hitting everywhere, every day…

    Fueled by $50 million from anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s personal fortune, the Obama-Biden-Bloomberg gun ban agenda is dangerously close to becoming a reality.
  • #131
    "Currently, the only thing standing in his way of full control is the 2nd Amendment."

    Would it be fair to say from this: "Guns protect our rights from the government"?
  • #135

    That's a fair assessment -- But more pointedly, I refer to our founders--

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”--- Thomas Jefferson

    "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”–- George Washington
  • #137

    The types of weapons people keep at home are NOT going to protect anyone from individuals to the best militia's out there from all the high tech killing power the government has.

    People enjoy fooling themselves that their guns will even make the government think twice . They won't.

    They will certainly protect you from a intruder , etc but not the government .

    Even the local SWAT team with their armor and vehicles that can smash through walls isn't going to be stopped , never mind government drones.

    The movie 'Red Dawn' is decades old .
  • #149

    Au Contraire-

    Most graduates of MS&T would disagree with that assessment. First off, your assuming that our military would back a Tyrannical administration circumventing the Constitution and rule-of-law on a grand scale. The majority in our all voluntary military our conservatives by definition according to the Military Times. They also take an oath to "protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic." As retired military, I assure you that would be a determining factor in defeating a would be zealot with dictatorial ambitions.

    Having said that -- The following is based on reality, not some class B movie--

    Some enterprising individual added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion:

    There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin .. Over the last several months, Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.

    More men under arms than in Iran .

    More than France and Germany combined.

    These men deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin , to hunt with firearms, and no one was killed.

    That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan's 700,000 hunters, all of whom have now returned home safely. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. It's millions more.

    The point?

    America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower.

    Hunting... it's not just a way to fill the freezer. It's a matter of national security.That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.

    Overall it's true, so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters don't possess the same skills as soldiers, the question would still remain... What army of 2 million would want to face 30, 40, 50 million armed citizens, most of which with some military service???

    Consider ...On a smaller scale, and with some outside help with weaponry, the 'rag-tag' Mujahideen defeated the entire soviet military in Afghanistan in spite of all their firepower and aircraft. They also took full use of captured armament....
  • R Load more replies

  • #16
    Just another example of your taxpayer dollars being used against you to create a Gestapo!

    Nothing but a bunch of criminal scum who will get what's coming to them one of these days =)
  • #313
    Hush now--

    FDA having pistola's is a good fit. It's been known that a few wild Cabbages have gone postal at Safeway -- Especially, those red ones. <wink>
  • #11
    I have no problem with federal employees bringing guns to work but this is a little too far. These guys don't need their own police force, we have plenty of our own and at this point it's a huge waste of taxpayer money.
  • #120
    @Zche but fed employee cannot bring firearms to work. they are disarmed by act of Congress (and the signature of an irresponsible President). overzealous security rentacops at many fed facilities even try to confiscate simple tools like a Leatherman claiming it is a weapon due to some arbitrary, locally-determined blade length rule that is not part of the statute.
  • #203
    @gherlone I didn't say they can bring firearms, I just said I don't have a problem with them bringing firearms...
  • #238
    @Zche fair enough. now we just have to convince our beloved elected officials to repeal that idiotic law & maybe we can limit the damage of the next attempted Navy Yard attack.
  • #159
    No regulatory agency needs a swat team or conduct swat style raids, their regulators not law enforcement. We have real law enforcement agencies if need be .
  • #157
    Because raw milk and artisan cheeses aged on wood shelves are deadly! Run to the hills, run for your lives!!! Repent, the end is near!!!/sarc

    I suppose it's to protect and serve the hell out of farmers that want to be left the hell alone by the Nanny State and their customers. Give me some raw milk or homemade cheese over the chemical laden GMO crap we find in the grocery store ANY DAY!
  • #130
    Crap. Hit the wrong button. I SUPPORT this legislation. The militarization of agencies like the IRS, FDA, EPA, etc. is simply unacceptable in a nation that is supposed to be run by the people, and not by an imperial government.
  • #257
    I agree..all the redundant agencies have people who run them that make good money and they don't want to give up their entrenched power...eliminate the ATF the DEA ...merge them with the FBI they can handle that and not have a bunch of upper crust appointees which cost the tax payers more money...We don't need duplicate and triplicate offices scattered around sucking up money...They dont like to share information because they compete we dont need that....Seems everyone in charge of something wants their own army of swat teams to command.
  • #35
    According to the gun control people, all you have to do is pass a law and nobody will ever use a gun to kill anyone ever again. Oh, wait; these drugs are already illegal but people are still disobeying the law against drugs? I just can't understand that. Can't the police just tell them they are breaking the law and they must turn themselves in? Why not use the military and National Guard to clean house once and for all so there are no smugglers? That's what they are trained for.
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    I can see the FDA having guns (they do deal with DRUGS, don't they?)
    But, why does the IRS, HUD......etc agencies have guns? They don't make "house" calls like the FDA.......
  • #19
    Yes I can agree with the FDA needing its own force, but the Dept of Education?huh? How the heck did anyone think THAT was a good idea?
  • #27

    I was thinking that the FDA should contact the DEA then since they're supposed to be the known enforcers on drug issues...the fewer agencies with guns the better.
  • #48
    @BravoJuliet - Wow! I see where this is going. Less 'agencies' with guns, but more people with them. So, it's a disarm the government, and arm the 'citizens' philosophy. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.......
  • #51
    @eyesonu HMMM.......considering not very many "good" stories are coming out about LEO's with guns, I can understand why fewer government agencies should practice the saying "The pen is mightier than the sword".
    Pens don't shoot people and try to cover it up.......
  • R Load more replies

  • #3
    If you want the FDA to chase smugglers and confiscate stuff from farmers, they need weapons. Having law enforcement responsibilities and abusing law enforcement responsibilities are separate issues.
  • #10
    chasing smugglers sounds like Border Patrol work ...and stealing things from farmers is the Bureau of land managements gig
  • #58
    There are other agencies better suited to catching smugglers and cracking down on unauthorized drug production. How much money could we save if we eliminated all the overlap?
  • #65
    @MarkColwell "How much money could we save if we eliminated all the overlap?"

    I'm generally on the side of saving money, but if we don't do it right, we'd end up with a government paramilitary organization the size of the National Guard, and a Civil Service controlling them who have proven they are not going to stay withing their legal boundaries. Maybe once we close the borders we can sort all these agencies out.
  • R Load more replies

  • #236
    I would like to hear the FDA explain when and in what instances a full blown shootout has occurred that makes them feel the need for an armed swat style team.
  • #224
    That's just a bullshit, big sound and no action, kind of thing to do.

    We need to demilitarize the vast majority of all our various police forces, not just federal, and stop letting the cops pretend that every move they make has to be made with maximum force and firepower.
  • R Load more comments...