tileman1814
Kalispell, MT
66, joined Nov. 2007
|
Govt Agencies Grow Weapon Stockpiles… More BUREAUCRATS With Guns Than MARINES
This statement needs to sink in! Why does these non-military need all of these weapons?Can somebody tell me what in the hell they need with the"HK-416"?The HK-416 is a sniper rifle. Is this obama's private army build up to deal with a coming revolution/civil war?
There is more than enough law enforcement to back up any and all of these government agencies.The bright side of this story is that it puts a lot of money into the gun manufactures coffers and keeps a lot of gun workers on the payrolls.
Semper Fi !!!
(WFB) – There are now more non-military government employees who carry guns than there are U.S. Marines, according to a new report.
Open the Books, a taxpayer watchdog group, released a study Wednesday that finds domestic government agencies continue to grow their stockpiles of military-style weapons, as Democrats sat on the House floor calling for more restrictions on what guns American citizens can buy.
The “Militarization of America” report found civilian agencies spent $1.48 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment between 2006 and 2014. Examples include IRS agents with AR-15s, and EPA bureaucrats wearing camouflage.
“Regulatory enforcement within administrative agencies now carries the might of military-style equipment and weapons,” Open the Books said. “For example, the Food and Drug Administration includes 183 armed ‘special agents,’ a 50 percent increase over the ten years from 1998-2008. At Health and Human Services (HHS), ‘Special Office of Inspector General Agents’ are now trained with sophisticated weaponry by the same contractors who train our military special forces troops.”
Open the Books found there are now over 200,000 non-military federal officers with arrest and firearm authority, surpassing the 182,100 personnel who are actively serving in the U.S. Marines Corps.
The IRS spent nearly $11 million on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment for its 2,316 special agents. The tax collecting agency has billed taxpayers for pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns, semi-automatic Smith & Wesson M&P15s, and Heckler & Koch H&K 416 rifles, which can be loaded with 30-round magazines.
The EPA spent $3.1 million on guns, ammo, and equipment, including drones, night vision, “camouflage and other deceptive equipment,” and body armor.
When asked about the spending, and EPA spokesman said the report “cherry picks information and falsely misrepresents the work of two administrations whose job is to protect public health.”
“Many purchases were mischaracterized or blown out of proportion in the report,” said spokesman Nick Conger. “EPA’s criminal enforcement program has not purchased unmanned aircraft, and the assertions that military-grade weapons are part of its work are false.”
“EPA’s criminal enforcement program investigates and prosecutes the most egregious violators of our nation’s environmental laws, and EPA criminal enforcement agents are law enforcement professionals who have undergone the same rigorous training as other federal agents,” Conger continued.
Other administration agencies that have purchased guns and ammo include the Small Business Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Education, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
The report also highlighted that the Department of Health and Human Services has “special agents” with “sophisticated military-style weapons.” Open the Books also found $42 million in gun and ammunition purchases that were incorrectly coded.
“Some purchases were actually for ping-pong balls, gym equipment, bread, copiers, cotton balls, or cable television including a line item from the Coast Guard entered as ‘Cable Dude,’” the report said.
Open the Books appealed to both liberals like Bernie Sanders—who has called for demilitarizing local police departments—and conservatives in its report.
“Conservatives argue that it is hypocritical for political leaders to undermine the Second Amendment while simultaneously equipping non-military agencies with hollow-point bullets and military style equipment,” Open the Books said. “One could argue the federal government itself has become a gun show that never adjourns with dozens of agencies continually shopping for new firearms.”
Update June 23, 10:15 a.m.: Following publication of this article, Adam Andrzejewski, the CEO of Open the Books who wrote the report, pushed back against the EPA’s statement, and provided contract data to back up his claims.
“How can the EPA spokesperson deny hard facts from their own checkbook?” he said. “Alongside our oversight report, OpenTheBooks.com also released a PDF of all raw data. This line-by-line transactional record from the EPA’s own checkbook on page 113 clearly shows that in 2013 and 2014 the EPA purchased tens of thousands of dollars of ‘Unmanned Aircraft’ from Bergen RC Helicopters Inc which on a net basis amounted to approximately $34,000.”
“All of the assertions in our oversight report are the quantification of actual spending records produced and reported to us by the federal agencies themselves,” Andrzejewski said.
Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!
|
sureshot40
Drumright, OK
48, joined Apr. 2011
|
I read that the national weather agency bought 100's of thousands of 223/5.56 rounds years ago. They ain't shooting storms.
Militarization of all government is here and they ain't worried about jihad terrorist. That leaves only American citizens.
Yes I'm politically incorrect and say ain't.
|
theindytechguy
Indianapolis, IN
57, joined Dec. 2013
|
And they're serving the public interest?
|
rcrmike
Souderton, PA
58, joined Apr. 2009
|
Well, let's do a little "what-if" scenario.
1.) If all these agencies have the intentions to attack anyone, will they?
2.) Maybe they will, maybe not. If they choose to attack, what are they expecting to win? And, what's in it for them? They draw arms on Americans! That is the most foolish thing they could try.
3.) How many government employees are there?
4.) How many Americans have their own protection?
5.) How many Americans have multiple weapons to share with family, friends, neighbors?
6.) Most people know where their neighbors work. If TSHTF, do you think the targeted Americans will address their government employed neighbor and take them out? We know who they are. They can run, but they cannot hide. They live right next door! How safe is THEIR family if an attack ensues?
7.) Exactly how much loyalty will they have to THEIR government job when the fight begins to return in their direction? What would a government employee have to gain? A promotion and health benefits? Can't collect if they are pushing up daisies!
8.) The only way to attack regular Americans is to disarm them first. It ain't gonna happen!
9.) A direct attack makes no sense...
... unless we allow a bunch of suicidal towelheads to get employed within OUR government agencies. 
"Behind every blade of grass is an American with a rifle, who knows how to use it".
Japanese Admiral after WWII
|
rcrmike
Souderton, PA
58, joined Apr. 2009
|
I had a few more minutes to think about this. We need to study history. History does have an uncanny tendency to repeat itself.
Didn't Great Britain once assault their "British" subjects residing in the far away colonies? How exactly did that work out when the Superpower of the day took on a rag-tag bunch of farmers?
Hmmm. First they tried to overtax them to pay for their Kingdom's debt. Then they attempted to over regulate them. Then they sent troops. That government turned on its own people and got their a** kicked.
Do we have a similar relationship with our federal government today? What about our states?
If it's us against them, I'm betting on us. Government has been known to flunk basic arithmetic. There are more of us than them. We win, they loose. Math doesn't lie.
There is a good result to come from this kind of conflict. We gain a much smaller government by default. Can we agree, it's a double win for us? We secondarily just balanced our budget by "firing" non-essential bureaocrats.
"Sucks to be them"! 
|