Tell your kids they bettr not cheat at school


PDA






bushmaster1313
March 11, 2010, 01:35 PM
Department of Education is buying short barreled shotguns.

Tell your kids they better not cheat at school:


https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=cb68cf9f3fa2fe18a83d1c3dee0039b2&tab=core&_cview=0

If you enjoyed reading about "Tell your kids they bettr not cheat at school" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Onward Allusion
March 11, 2010, 01:38 PM
Can someone please explain to me why would the US Dept of Ed would need short barrel shotguns? How about shotguns in general??? Why?

Scrapperz
March 11, 2010, 01:39 PM
Maybe Dept. of Ed is going to start teaching kids about firearms.......Hmmmm. I think they should tell the tax payers what their intentions are, if they haven't already.

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 01:40 PM
Perhaps the Department of Education is in charge of .MIL and .GOV training?

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 01:42 PM
Better yet... I asked the person in charge of Solicitation Number: EDOOIG-10-000004

wishin
March 11, 2010, 01:51 PM
A good idea in principle. Maybe they asked a tenured WWI vet who fought in the trenches for advice on guns.:rolleyes:

jnyork
March 11, 2010, 02:26 PM
This came up on another board. Someone email the DOE and got an answer back (imagine that!) stating the DOE has a Law Enforcement function and the shotguns are to replace worn out existing ones.

Begs the question, Why does Department of Education need a Law Enforcement function armed with shotguns?

WoofersInc
March 11, 2010, 02:28 PM
The U.S. Department of Education (ED) intends to purchase twenty-seven (27) REMINGTON BRAND MODEL 870 POLICE 12/14P MOD GRWC XS4 KXCS SF. RAMAC #24587 GAUGE: 12 BARREL: 14" - PARKERIZED CHOKE: MODIFIED SIGHTS: GHOST RING REAR WILSON COMBAT; FRONT - XS CONTOUR BEAD SIGHT STOCK: KNOXX REDUCE RECOIL ADJUSTABLE STOCK FORE-END: SPEEDFEED SPORT-SOLID - 14" LOP are designated as the only shotguns authorized for ED based on compatibility with ED existing shotgun inventory, certified armor and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts

Most large school districts have their own police forces. I'm sure the Dept of Education does also.

Reading the bold part tells me that they already have shotguns in inventory and protocols on them. They are just updating what they already have. No sinister intentions.

Most government agencies have their own police force.

hso
March 11, 2010, 02:33 PM
They are for the DoEd IG. http://www.ignet.gov/pande/standards/agleguidelines.pdf

Eyesac
March 11, 2010, 02:34 PM
Why is it the Feds (of any variety) feel the need to arm themselves and become law enforcement. Now the Dep of Education is law enforcement, how many branches of Federal law enforcement are there? Seriously how many are there?

Occam's Razor
March 11, 2010, 03:14 PM
Can someone please explain to me why would the US Dept of Ed would need short barrel shotguns? How about shotguns in general??? Why?New twist on the "No Child Left Behind" program?

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 03:55 PM
From the horses mouth:

Thank you for your email to Holly Le. Ms. Lee forwarded your email to the Office of Inspector General for response. As background, the Office of Inspector General is the law enforcement arm of the U.S. Department of Education and is responsible for the detection of waste, fraud, abuse, and other criminal activity involving Federal education funds, programs, and operations. As such, OIG operates with full statutory law enforcement authority, which includes conducting search warrants, making arrests, and carrying firearms. The acquisition of these firearms is necessary to replace older and mechanically malfunctioning firearms, and in compliance with Federal procurement requirements. For more information on OIG's law enforcement authority, please visit our Web site at: www.ed.gov/oig.
The information is available on the front page of our site.

Thank you again for your inquiry.

Catherine Grant
Public Affairs Liaison
U.S. Department of Education Office of Inspector General

bushmaster1313
March 11, 2010, 03:55 PM
Why so few? Not enough to put one in each of the states even if you do not count the extra seven

How did they get worn out, what were they doing with them?

Why short barreled?

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 04:03 PM
How did they get worn out, what were they doing with them?

Training I hope.

Why short barreled?

Better for tactical and CQ usage?

RebelRed
March 11, 2010, 04:04 PM
Wow. Can I have one? :)

Old Fuff
March 11, 2010, 04:15 PM
I can see that this is absolutely necessary, given that them six-year olds have been going 'round making fists with a finger extended and yelling, BANG!! What with this level of pro-tec-tion those concerned teachers will feel much more safe... :D

TexasRifleman
March 11, 2010, 04:17 PM
Can someone please explain to me why would the US Dept of Ed would need short barrel shotguns? How about shotguns in general??? Why?

This is FANTASTIC for us.

Here we have a non military group using NFA firearms.

Can you say "in common use"?

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 04:20 PM
College loan fraud is a multi million, if not billion dollar criminal activity. If you think these crimes take place with no threat or danger of violence your nuts.

Credit Card Scams, loan fraud, mail order fraud... all committed by criminals and some of them have various branches of the govt responsible for policing these crimes. Makes sense to me.

swagner89
March 11, 2010, 05:27 PM
must be the same reason IRS is buying shotguns:
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=8d3b076bd4de14bbda5aba699e80621d&tab=core&_cview=1&cck=1&au&ck

Z-Michigan
March 11, 2010, 05:30 PM
Seems like a perfect example of how we have far too many federal "law enforcement agencies" that carry guns.

I could get the IRS buying these shotguns, but the Dept of Education - insane.

Kevin5098
March 11, 2010, 05:32 PM
I don't believe our Founding Fathers ever intended for the proliferation of armed Federal Agencies to occur. The original guidlines governing the exercise of Law Enforcement Authority by executive agencies was signed by John Ashcroft from the Bush Administration. Apparently not all of Bush's "failed policies" have been rejected by the current administration.

tobyjones
March 11, 2010, 06:41 PM
While I do understand the potential "need" for weapons while performing their law enforcement functions wouldn't it be more cost effective to use the FBI or local law enforcement if conducting raids?

I am very interested in the choice of a 14' barrel. Are Federal agencies exempt from the $200 tax stamp?

General Geoff
March 11, 2010, 06:44 PM
I am very interested in the choice of a 14' barrel. Are Federal agencies exempt from the $200 tax stamp?

Of course they are. Because government agents are more trustworthy than private citizens.

makarovnik
March 11, 2010, 06:47 PM
Another example of government out of control. This just makes no sense and this particular branch of the DOE should be abolished. Let's start a petition or something.

Enachos
March 11, 2010, 06:51 PM
I don't see why this is bad. I highly doubt that the DOE is made up of untrained idiots ready to point guns at kids. They're just getting them for a reason... and if that reason was unreasonable then I suppose they wouldn't be getting those shotguns.

Still, This is pretty interesting.

Z-Michigan
March 11, 2010, 06:59 PM
They're just getting them for a reason... and if that reason was unreasonable then I suppose they wouldn't be getting those shotguns.

Have you ever heard of logic? That statement is so illogical it's hard to fathom that it was written deliberately.

Officers'Wife
March 11, 2010, 07:00 PM
Interesting, gives a whole new meaning to making schools a 'gun free' zone.

tobyjones
March 11, 2010, 07:18 PM
One other thing that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere else. What else does the Department of Education own? Would it be unreasonable to only carry a shotgun? Do they own any less lethal weaponry? What pistol do they carry? Who trains them? Where?


I emailed my senator asking her to look into this as this being the best use of tax dollars.

rm23
March 11, 2010, 07:35 PM
I am very interested in the choice of a 14' barrel. Are Federal agencies exempt from the $200 tax stamp?

Even if they are, it's like moving a $20 bill from your left hand to your right hand.

ants
March 11, 2010, 07:50 PM
US Department of Education doesn't run schools for children. Get rid of that notion.

They are a federal agency developing standards, rules, laws, etc., for state and local school districts and colleges. Just a great big giant bureaucracy like State, Justice, Commerce, Transportation, Homeland Security, Interior, Defense, Agriculture, Energy, Health and Human Services, HUD, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, and Labor.

They all have armed personnel.

One of our shooters at the club is a firearms instructor with a contract to provide training for armed personnel at the US Department of Energy, including training on hand-held rocket launchers (yes, DOE keeps HK rocket launchers!!!).

Most armed personnel are involved in building security, many of them in and around Washington DC. They provide arms for their security guards because, as you very well know, residents of DC find it very difficult to buy their own. Just two years ago the Supreme Court had to tell the DC city government to lighten up.

bushmaster1313
March 11, 2010, 10:13 PM
This is FANTASTIC for us.

Here we have a non military group using NFA firearms.

Can you say "in common use"?

Nice catch.

Does anyone actually know the reason for the group within the DOE?

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 10:19 PM
Does anyone actually know the reason for the group within the DOE?

Yes, see below... this is from the department making the purchase:

Thank you for your email to Holly Le. Ms. Lee forwarded your email to the Office of Inspector General for response. As background, the Office of Inspector General is the law enforcement arm of the U.S. Department of Education and is responsible for the detection of waste, fraud, abuse, and other criminal activity involving Federal education funds, programs, and operations. As such, OIG operates with full statutory law enforcement authority, which includes conducting search warrants, making arrests, and carrying firearms.

The acquisition of these firearms is necessary to replace older and mechanically malfunctioning firearms, and in compliance with Federal procurement requirements. For more information on OIG's law enforcement authority, please visit our Web site at: www.ed.gov/oig.

The information is available on the front page of our site.

Thank you again for your inquiry.

Catherine Grant
Public Affairs Liaison
U.S. Department of Education Office of Inspector General

LoneCoon
March 11, 2010, 10:58 PM
Sounds like there was some money left in the budget at the end of the year.

Enachos
March 11, 2010, 11:03 PM
Z-Michigan,

I'm simply stating that if the DOE is dealing with criminal matters, then doesn't it make some sense to arm them? I'm simply stating my opinion, you don't have to get worked up over it... relax man...

danprkr
March 11, 2010, 11:19 PM
I don't see why this is bad. I highly doubt that the DOE is made up of untrained idiots ready to point guns at kids. They're just getting them for a reason... and if that reason was unreasonable then I suppose they wouldn't be getting those shotguns.

Um, this is the feds your talking about. Since when have they had a reasonable reason for anything they've done? Seriously, the Department of Education is (according to their website) supposed to:

The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. It engages in four major types of activities:

1. Establishes policies related to federal education funding, administers distribution of funds and monitors their use.
2. Collects data and oversees research on America's schools.
3. Identifies major issues in education and focuses national attention on them.
4. Enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in programs that receive federal funds.
The Department enforces five civil rights statutes to ensure equal educational opportunity for all students, regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, disability or age. These laws extend to all state education agencies, elementary and secondary school systems, colleges and universities, vocational schools, proprietary schools, state vocational rehabilitation agencies, libraries and museums, and other entities that receive U.S. Department of Education funds. Specific examples of those whose rights are protected include homeless children with disabilities, individuals with limited English proficiency, women and girls in athletic programs, and people in need of vocational rehabilitation.


In digging further #4 comes down to the only thing even remotely resembling law enforcement, and I suppose they could be using the guns to stop teachers from keeping ____ minority out. :rolleyes:

Or, it could just be a huge boondoggle. I mean since when did a fed ever see a doggle that they didn't want to boon? After all, it's not their money!

bushmaster1313
March 12, 2010, 02:46 AM
What is the Office of the Inspector General doing in the Department of Education?

Shouldn't it be at the FBI?

dec41971
March 12, 2010, 02:56 AM
In some inner city areas the high schools are so bad kids take fights outside, and when school is out some of them have guns hidden some place close and been incidence of kids getting guns and shooting some other kids. The school district actually has a Police force in such areas (especially onces with well known violence or drug issues). When school is out, the cops come out in force and disperse the kids force them to head on home. Believe it or not, most of the kids know they will get off easy because they are minors and are more likely to shoot at cops than your average thug if they have a gun. That's right, just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it don't happen. The teachers are scared to death of the bully kids and not much learning goes on in those places. Its not really high school, more teen day care. :barf:

35wailen
March 12, 2010, 04:31 AM
I don't see why this is bad. I highly doubt that the DOE is made up of untrained idiots ready to point guns at kids. They're just getting them for a reason... and if that reason was unreasonable then I suppose they wouldn't be getting those shotguns.
That is my new signature. Holy smoke what nonsense. Let's analyze:

First sentence: Enacho's opinion being that he doesn't see how this is bad. Fair enough.

Second sentence: no one expects these to be pointed at kids because I think we all know that DOE does not educate any kids or run a single school. This is an issue of a purely paper pushing agency getting not just shotguns, but shotguns so "evil" that regular citizens are banned from owning them (if you're forced to register it with super complex paperwork, pay a gigantic fee, and are not allowed to take it across state lines without permission, you don't really own it)

FIRST HALF OF THIRD sentence: (the best one) Just getting them for a reason? Um, yea. I think everybody does EVERYTHING for a reason (priceless excuse masquerading as logic). I will tell the officer I was speeding for a reason. :evil:

SECOND HALF OF THIRD sentence: AWESOME. This one had me rolling because of COURSE, if it was unreasonable, government wouldn't be doing it. Riiiiiight. :banghead: :D :scrutiny:

danez71
March 12, 2010, 09:27 AM
That is my new signature. Holy smoke what nonsense. Let's analyze:

First sentence: Enacho's opinion being that he doesn't see how this is bad. Fair enough.

Second sentence: no one expects these to be pointed at kids because I think we all know that DOE does not educate any kids or run a single school. This is an issue of a purely paper pushing agency getting not just shotguns, but shotguns so "evil" that regular citizens are banned from owning them (if you're forced to register it with super complex paperwork, pay a gigantic fee, and are not allowed to take it across state lines without permission, you don't really own it)

FIRST HALF OF THIRD sentence: (the best one) Just getting them for a reason? Um, yea. I think everybody does EVERYTHING for a reason (priceless excuse masquerading as logic). I will tell the officer I was speeding for a reason. :evil:

SECOND HALF OF THIRD sentence: AWESOME. This one had me rolling because of COURSE, if it was unreasonable, government wouldn't be doing it. Riiiiiight. :banghead: :D :scrutiny:

Oh jiminy crickets....

lets see...


your 1st - fair enough

2nd - 1st sentence ok. The rest is your ranting opinion. Its been posted more than once that they are resposible for more than just pushing paper. Read the WHOLE thread.

3rd 1st half - Big difference. They obvisouly can legally get them. You saying you'll tell the police you have a reason for breaking the law (speeding) is a poor analogy at best.

3rd 2nd half - They submitted their reason and it was approved. Simple enough to understand. If you dont agree with it, which I can understand, try spending less time on a gun forum and more time on a political forum... or even better yet, actually participate in the political system and work to get things changed.

:confused: I thought this was a gun forum and not a political forum :confused:

cassandrasdaddy
March 12, 2010, 09:36 AM
but how can we really know what to think till radley balko tells us? oops never mind this isn't about legalizing smoke radleys out

GRIZ22
March 12, 2010, 09:56 AM
I am very interested in the choice of a 14' barrel. Are Federal agencies exempt from the $200 tax stamp

All LE agencies on all levels and the military don't pay a transfer tax. It would be the equivalent of taking your money out of one pocket and putting it in the other.

how many branches of Federal law enforcement are there?

As ants related above, every department in the federal government is tasked with providing it's own security and criminal investigative function. This obviously casuses a lot of overlap but would you rather have one agency do everything? A single national police? Like the Federal Judicial Police in Mexico? There are Special Agents in the Forest Service and Health and Human Services that do criminal investigations, the National Zoo Police, and Supreme Court Police just to name a few.

Sounds like there was some money left in the budget at the end of the year.

No a planned purchase. The mad spending goes on in August and September as FY for budgets starts October 1.

What is the Office of the Inspector General doing in the Department of Education?


Every federal department has an Inspector General, Internal Affairs, Office of Professional Responsibility or something like that to police their agency.

ny32182
March 12, 2010, 10:00 AM
You know, the Brady Bunch also gets their panties in a wad over a few shotguns... sheesh.

FloridaConfederate
March 12, 2010, 10:06 AM
Honorable intentions not likely. This is simply another example of the tyranny being conducted through coercion when possible, through the point of a barrel when "necessary". The feds do not get it. When your vehicle doe not start over an over start thinking about what the cause is. Beating it with a bat does not solve the problem.

SSN Vet
March 12, 2010, 10:10 AM
Can someone please explain to me why would the US Dept of Ed would need short barrel shotguns?

Our elite political masters must feel the need to protect themselves from the little peons they rule over.....

You see, we now have gov't of the people, by the elite, for the elite....

apparently the elite is concerned that the people might get ticked off and demand "change"

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 10:37 AM
So...doesn't the misuse/appropriations of education funds (i.e. fraud, embezzlement, etc) already fall under the jurisdiction of the FB freakin I? You wonder why the gubmnt is bankrupt?! We have a DOJ and FBI. We also have a number of state and local LE agencies perfectly capable of making arrests and investigation. Would it not be best to give firearms, training, and funding to a SINGLE law enforcement agency in the government not 700 of them?

mcdonl
March 12, 2010, 10:49 AM
Ah, the hypocrites of THR are rearing their ugly heads. If this were ANY NON GOVERNMENT GROUP they would be applauded, and the discussion would be around the purchase of the guns, how they would be deployed, training, etc...

But because it was the Government buying the guns it turns into politics. I cannot believe this thread has not been shutdown yet.

Paranoid is more then a cool Black Sabbath song.

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2010, 10:56 AM
But because it was the Government buying the guns it turns into politics. I cannot believe this thread has not been shutdown yet.

I dunno. Seemed like a reasonable question to wonder why the Dept of Education would need NFA firearms.

I doubt very many people were aware they had an LE branch. I sure wasn't.

Learn something new every day.

mcdonl
March 12, 2010, 11:07 AM
I dunno. Seemed like a reasonable question to wonder why the Dept of Education would need NFA firearms.

I doubt very many people were aware they had an LE branch. I sure wasn't.

TRM, no offense meant. I posted on the first page the response from the buyer. I didn't know either. But then all of the rants about the the government vs us started. Silly.

The ATF, DEA and other specialized government offices have always had their own law enforcement and now we know the DOE is no different. Doesn't mean they are out to get us. :)

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2010, 11:10 AM
Doesn't mean they are out to get us.

Oh I'm with you, some people love to look for a conspiracy :)

bushmaster1313
March 12, 2010, 11:11 AM
Looks like all the Federal Departments have an Office of Inspector General:

http://www.ignet.gov/igs/homepage1.html

Most curious point is why 14" barrels?

This could lead to an overturn of the finding in Miller that there was no evidence that a short barreled shotgun was a military weapon and thus not covered under the 2nd Amendment!

Note, one of the earlier posts picked this up first.

TexasBill
March 12, 2010, 11:53 AM
Since the shotguns are going to Chicago, I figured it was because they couldn't have handguns.

As far as I can tell, every branch of the U.S. government has an armed force of some sort. There's even a FBI Police Dept. And here I thought the FBI was a police force.

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 01:11 PM
I would not say I am anti government. A legitimate law enforcement agency needs guns. i would not expect any cop to hit the street unarmed. I do however question the need for every department in the federal government to have it's own police force. Seems to me the FBI was created for just that reason.

Eyesac
March 12, 2010, 01:35 PM
I have a fun new game: Name ONE Federal agency that isn't a law enforcement agency with ninjas with short barreled shotguns and machine guns.

Enachos
March 12, 2010, 01:55 PM
danparker and dan wailen,

I'm simply trying to state what mcdonl and TexasRifleman are saying... "THEY AREN'T OUT TO GET US." There is no conspiracy going on here... that's ALL I'm saying.... sounds like the Brady's invaded this forum. haha

Z-Michigan
March 12, 2010, 02:45 PM
Ah, the hypocrites of THR are rearing their ugly heads. If this were ANY NON GOVERNMENT GROUP they would be applauded, and the discussion would be around the purchase of the guns, how they would be deployed, training, etc...

But because it was the Government buying the guns it turns into politics. I cannot believe this thread has not been shutdown yet.

Paranoid is more then a cool Black Sabbath song.

Quite the opposite, I think this is merely you demonstrating that you believe the government is always in the right, and could never possibly do anything wrong, wasteful, or just plain silly.

As I posted earlier, I can understand the purchase of 14" shotguns by an agency with normal law enforcement activities and a reasonable prospect of encountering bad guys. I do not see the Dept. of Education (btw to all, DOE usually means Energy) having anything close to normal law enforcement functions or having any real chance of actually encountering bad guys. Sending a letter that a school district is out of compliance with some 10,000 page regulation is not the same as ordinary law enforcement.

So, as I also already stated, the problem is that the purchase of these shotguns does not appear to have anything reasonable, or dare I say even rational, to do with the known purpose and mission of the Dept. of Education.

Rather, it reminds me of a range visit I had a year ago where I encountered two ninja-wannabe security guards who had M4geries that looked like Magpul demonstrators. All so they can be more intimidating when they called actual LE to deal with a parking violation or something equally serious.

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2010, 03:02 PM
THEY AREN'T OUT TO GET US." There is no conspiracy going on here... that's ALL I'm saying.

Cops love to have the coolest and latest toys just as much as we do. The only difference is they are using taxpayer money and they don't have the legal restrictions that we do.

That, of course, is what the whole "in common use" thing in Miller was to be about.

I have no problem with government agencies having these types of firearms, I have a problem with that same government telling me I can't.

This, or something like it, is going to eventually be the kind of opportunity we have to challenge some of the NFA stuff. Scalia indicated in Heller that the door was open to some of that, based on the "in common use" stuff.

So, an agency that clearly doesn't have law enforcement as it's primary objective is buying NFA weapons.

That shows that the things have both a military and a non-military application, which helps us if we can take advantage of it.

mcdonl
March 12, 2010, 03:06 PM
Sigh

danprkr
March 12, 2010, 08:12 PM
Enachos

Just because we're paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't out to get us. Seriously, I just find it odd that with their supposed function that they need any firearms. If they don't need them, then they need to stay out of my pocket book for the money for them.

GRIZ22
March 12, 2010, 09:04 PM
So...doesn't the misuse/appropriations of education funds (i.e. fraud, embezzlement, etc) already fall under the jurisdiction of the FB freakin I? You wonder why the gubmnt is bankrupt?! We have a DOJ and FBI.

Yes it does fall under the jurisdiction of the FBI. The FBI will have jurisdiction in whatever they choose to. Espionage is about the only crime the FBI has complete jurisdiction in and there can still be overlaps. The FBI decided they wanted to do drug investigations in the early 80s so they did. There already was a DEA for about 10 years. The drug business was so big by the late 80s, early 90s, the Customs Service went back into the drug business full time. You have to remember the FBI is relatively new compared to some other Federal LE Agencies. US Marshals and Customs were first in 1789 and about the only two Federal LE Agencies for a long time. New agencies were craeted to meet different threats. The Coast Guard evolved from the Revenue Marines which started in 1790, the Secret Service dates to 1865, etc. A separation of powers in law enforcement is not a bad thing.

Concurrent jurisdications is not a bad thing. Currently, CBP, ICE, DEA, and FBI all do drug smuggling to some degree. If you have a crooked agency one of the others has a chance of catching them. If one agency did everything that probably wouldn't happen.

We also have a number of state and local LE agencies perfectly capable of making arrests and investigation. Would it not be best to give firearms, training, and funding to a SINGLE law enforcement agency in the government not 700 of them?
__________________


State and local agencies have no jurisdiction in almost all Federal laws. This has become an issue in many areas regarding the illegal alien problem. If they did give state and local agencies jurisdiction and responsibility in all Federal Laws the first thing that comes to mind is Constitutional issues and "unfunded mandate". Who does the Federal Government think they are telling my state they have to enforce Federal law and give us no money for it?

There is also need for different agencies due to the complexity of many laws. Try reading Title 8 of the US Code (Aliens and Nationality) and just pick out the ways someone can derive US Citizenship. Add to that special legislation that creates more ways citizenship can be derived. You would think there would no illegal alien problem because there are so many ways to get citizenship.

Also consider the fact if one agency is doing it all you would need a few years to train every investigator all the laws and they would never be very proficient in understanding all of them. You would also wind up with about the same number of people to enforce those laws if they were all in one agency.

ps There are about 90 Federal LE Agencies.

az_imuth
March 13, 2010, 09:01 AM
Here is the home page for the Department of Education's Inspector General...

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/index.html?src=oc

...and here is the document outlining their law enforcement authorization.

http://www.ignet.gov/pande/standards/agleguidelines.pdf

Authorization dated December 8, 2003 and signed by Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Madcap_Magician
March 15, 2010, 06:04 PM
There is an absolute alphabet soup of federal agencies who have an armed LEO unit of some kind or another. Even the Library of Congress has a police force. Ridiculous? Maybe. I honestly don't have an opinion. But they're only buying like 27 shotguns. Undoubtedly because the DoE IG armed unit is probably maybe 200 officers for the whole country.

zorro45
March 15, 2010, 10:32 PM
This is in case a 6 y.o. makes his finger into a "gun" and has to be arrested, or in a really bad case, makes a chicken nugget into a gun and creates a "hostile learning environment."

bushmaster1313
March 15, 2010, 11:27 PM
I think each Department has its own Office of the Inspector General charged with investigating fraud. I can imagine the need to send an armed force to investigate certain fraud and also to served an armed subpoena to confiscate documents and computers.

It would, however, be more efficient for the FBI to keep swat/armed teams at their local offices who could be used by each department. Sort of like the Marines guard all the U.S. embassies around the world and each emabassy does not need its own private armed force.

Not every Department needs a swat/armed team each day, and all the department buildings could be guarded by the Federal Marshall Service.

MisterMike
March 16, 2010, 10:30 AM
Every department of the executive branch has an OIG, which consists of an audit and a law enforcement function. The agents are fully qualified LEOs and are trained at one of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (http://www.fletc.gov/).

They have jurisdiction over crimes involving their agency, such as fraud by employees, contractors and bidders, and also investigate general crimes--like thefts, assaults and murders--on areas within their agency's control. Like most LEOs they occasionally find themselves in situations where it is prudent to have sufficient firepower--serving warrants and subpoenas, executing arrests, etc.

Over the years I've worked pretty extensively with OIG agents from a number of agencies, and I've found them to be intelligent, dedicated and very capable. As a taxpayer, I think it's a good thing they're there--they are very serious about safeguarding the integrity and security of their agencies and work very hard to ferret out fraud.

If you have a problem with the mission or power of the executive agencies themselves, I can understand that perspective (I don't always agree with that viewpoint, but I understand and respect it). But, as a whole, the agents who work in the various OIG offices are dedicated and professional. And they do face the same challenges and dangers that other LEOs encounter.

bushmaster1313
March 16, 2010, 11:36 AM
Over the years I've worked pretty extensively with OIG agents from a number of agencies, and I've found them to be intelligent, dedicated and very capable. As a taxpayer, I think it's a good thing they're there--they are very serious about safeguarding the integrity and security of their agencies and work very hard to ferret out fraud.

If you have a problem with the mission or power of the executive agencies themselves, I can understand that perspective (I don't always agree with that viewpoint, but I understand and respect it). But, as a whole, the agents who work in the various OIG offices are dedicated and professional. And they do face the same challenges and dangers that other LEOs encounter.

I would not expect anything less from the dedicated LEO's at the Federal Agencies. And a good point about making arrests, but isn't the heavy lifting a job for the FBI? The Attorney General, to whom the FBI reports, is the Country's "Top Cop". Separate Federal Law enforcement agencies that do not report to the Attorney General do not make sense (unless, of course, they are investigating the Attorney General!)

The question, I guess, is why does each Agency need its own armed investigation force?

It's bad enough when you have turf wars between the local cops (God Bless all of them) and the Feds (God Bless them too). To compound the turf battles by having multiple Federal investigatory units seems to me to not make sense. But what do I know, I am only a taxpayer.

MisterMike
March 16, 2010, 01:15 PM
I would not expect anything less from the dedicated LEO's at the Federal Agencies. And a good point about making arrests, but isn't the heavy lifting a job for the FBI? The Attorney General, to whom the FBI reports, is the Country's "Top Cop". Separate Federal Law enforcement agencies that do not report to the Attorney General do not make sense (unless, of course, they are investigating the Attorney General!)

The question, I guess, is why does each Agency need its own armed investigation force?

Well, I'm at a pay level a bit below that where these decisions are made, but I can give you some practical perspective. You'll have to decide if it makes sense.

First, I'd reiterate that each OIG office has a dual function--audit and investigation. They often work together, particularly when audits trigger suspicion of criminal acts. I'd opine that it's always a good idea for a federal agency to have an internal auditor, as a very basic guarantee against fraud and waste (yeah, I know, but it does seem to work).

There are a couple of arguments for agency-specific LEOs: First, the FBI is spread very thin and they have a huge range of statutes and programs within their jurisdiction. My experience is that the amount of attention they can give to a particular "program area" is subject to wide variation. For instance, after 9/11 white collar crimes fell off the radar and it was like pulling teeth to get FBI support for those investigations. When agencies have their own criminal investigators, you can be reasonably certain that they will continue to focus a fair amount of effort on the crimes that would otherwise drop off the FBI's radar screen.

Also, there's something to be said for having agents who are specifically assigned to the programs and products that fall within an agency's purview; at the onset of any investigation there can be a huge learning curve. If a DOT agent, for instance, is familiar with how highway construction works and knows the types of fraud that are often perpetrated, it can result in a more efficiently-run investigation with a higher likelihood of catching the bad guys.

Anyway, my personal experience has been that it works. I recognize that overlap is not always a good thing, and that there are contrary opinions. Whatever your opinion on whether these agencies are wasteful, I can tell you that my experience is that the OIG agents are pretty uniformly excellent (as are the FBI types with whom I've worked).

(BTW, none of what I say constitutes the "official opinion" of my employer; these are just my personal observations and opinions . . . as is the case with everything I post in these forums).

Skillet
March 17, 2010, 05:43 PM
One Law enforcement agency like the FBI or the CIA or whatever else cannot tackle every crime. that's why they have different units within that agency to deal with specific crimes. white collar crimes, gun crimes, special victims, ect...
and sometimes a crime industry can get so huge that they will create a whole new agency for those crimes like border patrol and many others that need to be there for a sake of keeping the LE local, so you don't have an FBI agent in Washington DC controlling a crime investigation in Nevada. sometiemes I wonder if they should do this with legislation...
but back to the point, I don't think we have to worry about any school's law enforcement officers shooting down kids. They probably just want a new toy (Who doesn't?)

GRIZ22
March 17, 2010, 07:38 PM
Sort of like the Marines guard all the U.S. embassies around the world and each emabassy does not need its own private armed force.


Many embassies in high risk areas also have civilian contract security forces who do the run of the mill security duties.

Not every Department needs a swat/armed team each day, and all the department buildings could be guarded by the Federal Marshall Service.


Agents having shotguns does not equate to a SWAT team. A large majority of the members of this forum will say a shotgun is the best home defense weapon. I can't see any reason to deny a shotgun to any LEO when making arrests.

99%+ of the arrests made by Federal Agencies (or any LE agency for that matter) are not made by SWAT teams but regular working agents. This includes a lot of violent, armed felons. Just because the guy may be armed is no reason to call a SWAT team. Agents are all trained in conducting raids, serving warrants, and making arrests at FLETC in Georgia in Basic Criminal Investigator School (except FBI and DEA who go to Quantico). Secret Service, Agriculture, ICE, Dept of Energy, Forest Service, IRS etc all criminal investigators get the same basic training.

If you enjoyed reading about "Tell your kids they bettr not cheat at school" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!