9
9
0
Posted 9 mo ago
Responses: 4
I think the bigger question is WHY ARE WE ARMING IRS AGENTS?
Lt Col Charlie Brown LTC Trent Klug MSgt John McGowan Cpl Vic Burk Sgt (Join to see) CWO4 Terrence Clark CPL Douglas Chrysler SGT Jim Arnold MSgt James Parker LTC Stephen F. SGT Steve McFarland SGT Mark Anderson SMSgt Lawrence McCarter CMSgt (Join to see) SPC Gary C. COL Randall C. Sgt (Join to see) LTC David Brown SFC John D.
Lt Col Charlie Brown LTC Trent Klug MSgt John McGowan Cpl Vic Burk Sgt (Join to see) CWO4 Terrence Clark CPL Douglas Chrysler SGT Jim Arnold MSgt James Parker LTC Stephen F. SGT Steve McFarland SGT Mark Anderson SMSgt Lawrence McCarter CMSgt (Join to see) SPC Gary C. COL Randall C. Sgt (Join to see) LTC David Brown SFC John D.
(14)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SFC John D. Did not know they were transferred.
But even then, there is a difference between investigations and arrests. I work in Children's Social work. We have protective service workers who conduct investigations. We have *special* investigators who handle particularly sensitive (read: guaranteed to go criminal if founded) cases. Both regular CPS and SIU refer cases for criminal charges on a regular basis. You know what they don't have? A badge. A gun. Warrant authority. If they need that, they call the local PD or Sherriff's Office.
Why does it take a badge and a gun to investigate financial crimes, 99% of which, at this point, is investigated on a computer? For that 1% where you need a cop, you talk to the AUSA/FBI, provide your evidence, and pursue a warrant. Once you have that, the FBI serves it and gathers evidence OR secures the scene for you to gather evidence.
There is still no need for armed and badged IRS agents.
But even then, there is a difference between investigations and arrests. I work in Children's Social work. We have protective service workers who conduct investigations. We have *special* investigators who handle particularly sensitive (read: guaranteed to go criminal if founded) cases. Both regular CPS and SIU refer cases for criminal charges on a regular basis. You know what they don't have? A badge. A gun. Warrant authority. If they need that, they call the local PD or Sherriff's Office.
Why does it take a badge and a gun to investigate financial crimes, 99% of which, at this point, is investigated on a computer? For that 1% where you need a cop, you talk to the AUSA/FBI, provide your evidence, and pursue a warrant. Once you have that, the FBI serves it and gathers evidence OR secures the scene for you to gather evidence.
There is still no need for armed and badged IRS agents.
(5)
(0)
LTC Trent Klug
I understand the need for armed IRS investigators. Weapons training is needed and can be dangerous if people get complacent or careless.
(3)
(0)
1SG Michael Bonnett
I do not see a need for the IRS at all. President Lincoln signed the second revenue measure of the Civil War into law, the IRS in 1862. We got along fine without it for over a hundred years and we can again. There is NO need for any member of the IRS to have an issued gun.
(3)
(0)
Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth
MSG Stan Hutchison - Stan...not different duties...the Secret Service is the LE autority for the Departmentof the treasury which the IRS falls into...therefore no other law enforcement is needed to ensure people aren't cheating on their taxes during an "audit".
(1)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth - I understand your point, but if we follow that to the logical conclusion, we would have only one law-enforcement covering the entire federal system. FBI?
(3)
(0)
SFC John D.
MSG Stan Hutchison - Not true. Federal law gives the FBI authority to investigate all federal crime not assigned exclusively to another federal agency (28, Section 533 of the U.S. Code) - they don't have the authority to investigate crimes that are under the jurisdiction of another agency (they can be invited to assist, but they don't have authority otherwise).
(0)
(0)
SFC John D.
Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth - Slight correction Scott (hate to correct you when you're talking with someone that accused you of "anti-everything babble"), but the Secret Service isn't party of the Department of Treasury (they were moved to DHS back in 2003).
(0)
(0)
LTC Eugene Chu
..."The range is on property that belongs to the Federal Bureau of Prisons. But because of an interagency agreement, other law enforcement agencies typically use the facility."...
..."The range is on property that belongs to the Federal Bureau of Prisons. But because of an interagency agreement, other law enforcement agencies typically use the facility."...
(4)
(0)
Read This Next