INS to be disbanded !

[M1911]

M1911: What do you mean that the INS be split up? The INS came under the Justice Department and consisted of 3 separate entities. 1. Travel Control (Immigration Inspectors, Immigration Examiners, etc.) 2. Investigations. 3. Border Patrol. Each of these came under different bosses within their respective organization. I am a little confused also about all the Deportations you talk about. The Border Patrol very seldom deported anyone.

Barney: I'm not talking about Border Patrol at all. I'm talking about INS detention and deportation. They do deport people all the time. My friend has done deportations to garden spots in the Caribbean, Africa, Middle East, Far East, and Eastern Europe. Most of the folks he's deported have served time for felony convictions.

It is my understanding, directly from him, an INS Detention and Deportation officer (not Border Patrol), that they have historically reported to the local district office. The local district office head is responsible for both the service side and detention/deportation. That local district office head is typically completely clueless about enforcement.

M1911

 

[Barney]

The deportation issue

M1911: Thanks for getting me straight. Sorry I misunderstood you. I suppose that could be a problem but there were other problems associated with the INS, namely the policies at the Port of Entry that cause the illegal Immigration in the first place. The biggest problem the INS has always had was letting too many aliens in the country without proper screening. Local Border Crossers from Mexico is the biggest problem. I suspect that will continue. Second biggest problem is F1 Non-immigrants which are Students. The next biggest problem was and still will be the problem of keeping track of Border Crossers from Mexico that have documents authorizing them to go pass the 25 mile limit. Monitoring and keeping close tabs on F1 Students is another big problem. Workers brought in under the non-immigrant Visa H1B often time also get lossed in the shuffle. Barney

 

[Coronach]

Not gun related, so it can't be in General. However, legal and political would fit...

Mike

 

[M1911]

Barney: Yup, there's lots of other problems with the INS. Inadequate screening is a real big problem. The easily abused asylum rules are another problem.

Some of these problems are due to the agency itself. Some are due to laws passed by congress and their liberal interpretation by immigration judges.

 

[Erik]

So to keep thing gun related, anyone care to comment on which pistol will become standardized?

INS issues Berreta 96Ds and HK USPc 40S&W depending on position. Though apparently everyone is currently being issued the HKs at the academies, as the Beretta contract is up. (The appropration tests and haggling is currently under way.)

Customs issues the G17s and (I think) the 9mm HK USPc, again depending on position.

APHIS... I'm not sure what they issue.

Keep in mind that the numbers of armed INS officers and agents exceed the combined totals from USCS and APHIS.

There... That aught to be "gunny" enough.

 

[ahenry]

Erik,

The NFU tests are now over. Nothing has spilled yet as to the new weapon, but they still issue the Berretta at the academy. The original word was that agents could get whatever the new approved weapon (at their expense) in January. That has changed to June, but I wouldn’t necessarily figure it would happen then either. I hear the rumor that HK, Sig, and Glock all submitted pistols for the test that just finished. I also know that Glock failed the last test (when the Berretta was picked) miserably, and I have no idea if they managed to do better this time, though I would suspect that they did. I wouldn’t think trainees would get issued the new weapon until late this year. IF all the combined agencies start being issued the same weapon, my money would be that what the INS selects (through the latest NFU test) would be what was selected for anything across the board. Just a guess though.

 

[M1911]

IIRC, the uniformed detention/deportation officers must carry the 96 when uniformed, but can carry the USPc off duty. Plain clothes investigators are issued the USPc.

 

[Erik]

Aherny,
The three guys at my port who got back from FLETC last week were pretty bummed that they missed the HK cut by one class. Per them, the two Insector classes following them were issued the HKs. How long that will last is anyone's guess, though.

But regardless of what the INS issues now, or may in the next year or so, what might the future hold. Anyone got a crystal ball handy?

 

[ahenry]

The three guys at my port who got back from FLETC last week were pretty bummed that they missed the HK cut by one class. Per them, the two Insector classes following them were issued the HKs. How long that will last is anyone's guess, though.

Ah. I was speaking specifically of the BP, my knowledge becomes more spotty when it comes to Immigration Inspectors. Sorry, I should have been clearer. Can’t they go buy their own HK though? Everybody else can and I thought II's could carry the USP on duty. No?

But regardless of what the INS issues now, or may in the next year or so, what might the future hold. Anyone got a crystal ball handy?

My money is on the USP. Glock previously had problems with the hot INS load and I’m not convinced they were able to fix things, or were even inclined to for that matter. Berretta, while performing great in the first tests years ago, has since had lots of problems. Additionally, I think that Berretta was unwilling to guarantee their pistols if the ammo came from multiple sources (this is somewhat rumor, so use your salt). My guess with the Sig is that they’ll be too expensive, even though cost is a small portion of the overall selection process. I don’t really see any other manufacturers out there with an existing weapon that could compete. Of course that’s not to say they didn’t come up with a new pistol for just this purpose, the INS contract is pretty large, I just don’t really see it happening. I really think the competition came down to Sig, Glock, and HK. And I don’t think Sig or Glock could match the HK on the cost and reliability fronts respectively. As to the combining agencies and weapons is concerned, who knows? I don’t see that becoming an issue however. Of all the issues that face the DHS transition team, I suspect that weapon selection is at the bottom of the stack.

 

[Erik]

It's all good, my friend.

"Of all the issues that face the DHS transition team, I suspect that weapon selection is at the bottom of the stack."

You've got that right. (I brought it up only to keep the conversation "gunny.")

 

[Bahadur]

I wonder how the "service" element - processing permanent residency and naturalization applications, for example - of the INS will be affected.

Can someone offer an analytical response to the question?

 

[ahenry]

I wonder how the "service" element - processing permanent residency and naturalization applications, for example - of the INS will be affected.

In short, positively. In practice, who knows? To be brief (mainly ‘cause I don’t have the details in front of me) there are a number of congressional dictates that should impact the speed with which immigrants are dealt with. IIRC, there are several dates during the “transition†phase of the DHS, on which the “service side†of the INS will have to show specific steps taken that will improve its processing and its accessibility to immigrants. I’ll try to dig through my notes and get back to you, but as of right now, it appears to be a major step in the right direction (naysayer’s notwithstanding).

 

[Bahadur]

ahenry:

In short, positively. In practice, who knows? To be brief (mainly ‘cause I don’t have the details in front of me) there are a number of congressional dictates that should impact the speed with which immigrants are dealt with. IIRC, there are several dates during the “transition†phase of the DHS, on which the “service side†of the INS will have to show specific steps taken that will improve its processing and its accessibility to immigrants. I’ll try to dig through my notes and get back to you, but as of right now, it appears to be a major step in the right direction (naysayer’s notwithstanding).

Interesting. My thanks for your reply. I await further details...

 

[ahenry]

The DHS is attempting to improve the flow of information as well as improve the efficiency of the immigration and naturalization process but as I keep saying, we’ll have to wait and see.

Part of the improvements as I see them are that under the new system there will be, 1) Required “inspection†of the system and process, as well as a required “response†to any recommendations within a specific timeframe. 2) One individual who reports directly to the undersecretary and whose main job description is finding the problems and making the recommendations to solve them (unfortunately somebody that does this job right puts themselves out of work, so...). 3) Combined agencies eliminate a lot of “cross work†that existed in the past. For example, in the past both Customs and INS could be working on the same exact investigation without knowing the other was doing so. Eliminating that should help with workload. 4) One “agency†whose sole function is immigration and naturalization processing. 5) Separate budgets for the two sides of immigration (enforcement and services). This was mainly an issue for the BP, but I think that splitting this will positively impact the “Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services†as well. There's more that is going on, but that is sort of the basics and should give an idea of what I'm getting at.


These are a couple of things that the new DHS has done (is doing/will do) that I think will have a net positive impact on immigrants. As we all know (none better than those that have immigrated here, like yourself) there is a long way to go in order to improve things for those attempting to become citizens legally. Nevertheless, as I have said for a long time, improving this side of things is a vital step. Whether this specific step turns out to be an actual improvement or nothing more than a shell game we will have to wait and see. I do think however, that there is a push from the top to make improvements in this arena. That in and of itself is a major improvement over the last administration.

 

[Bahadur]

ahenry:

Thanks for the information. One can only hope...

I attended one of Newt Gingrich's talks a while back, and he cited the INS as the prime example of bureaucratic inertia and technological inefficiency.

Things have changed a bit since then, I guess...