U.S. Dept of Agriculture to purchase .40S&W Submachine Guns

[MechAg94]

Also, my Kel-tec Sub2000 in 40 cal only has 22 round capacity with Glock Mags. What subguns currently have 30 round capacity in 40 caliber?

[MechAg94]

Prescriptions aren't about safety, they're about money --ensuring a revenue stream for doctors and keeping prices high for pharma companies.

It's funny that you say that while totally ignoring the family member who is permanently damaged by a illegal non prescription device.

There are a LOT of prescription drugs that are tricky and need to be used in the right dosage and on the right schedule to be effective and/or safe. Reactions with other drugs must also be looked at. Stuff like antibiotics can be compeletly ineffective if used in the wrong dosage or using the wrong antibiotic. While there might be some drugs that don't need much knowledge to use, there are quite a few that do.

[Chaparral]

This evening's news showed USDA agents participating in felony arrest raids involving fraudulent sale/purchase of Lone Star (food stamp) cards, so they do apparently engage in some high risk policing activities in urban environments, in addition to policing some rural public lands.

[anygunanywhere]

This evening's news showed USDA agents participating in felony arrest raids involving fraudulent sale/purchase of Lone Star (food stamp) cards, so they do apparently engage in some high risk policing activities in urban environments, in addition to policing some rural public lands.

Those food stamp frauds are known to be a particularly vicious bunch.

/sarcasm.

This proves nothing except the continued militarization of the fed agencies.

[EEllis]

Those food stamp frauds are known to be a particularly vicious bunch.

/sarcasm.

You know I thought I would check and guess what I found.

Following is a list of closed cases that involved potential physical danger to investigators,
USDA employees, or the public.1 The list contains noteworthy case examples and is not
intended to be comprehensive. In recent years, OIG has averaged over 800 active
investigations annually.
1) In approximately 1995, two OIG special agents acting in an undercover capacity in a
food stamp investigation had guns put to their heads and were accused of “being
police” during an undercover operation. In this instance the agents were not
harmed.
2) In approximately 1999, an explosive device was thrown through the window of an
OIG surveillance van in Chicago. The agents were conducting surveillance on a store
involved in a food stamp investigation. The agents had exited the van before the
device was thrown through the window. The explosive device set the van on fire and
destroyed the vehicle.
3) In 2008, during an ongoing crop insurance investigation, an agricultural producer
threatened to kill OIG special agents. In November 2010, OIG special agents
executed a Federal search warrant on the producer’s residence and discovered
multiple firearms (three handguns and three long rifles on the premises) and
ammunition. The producer also had a pistol immediately accessible outside his
residence as special agents arrived to execute the search warrant. The producer was
prohibited from possessing a firearm because he was a convicted felon.2
In January
2012, he threatened to assault and murder an OIG special agent. When arresting the
producer later that year, OIG agents located another handgun under his bed. The
producer pled guilty to multiple charges, including conspiring to make false
statements, aggravated identity theft, money laundering, unlawful possession of
firearms and ammunition, and retaliating against a Federal official (for threatening to
kill an OIG agent on several occasions). The producer was subsequently sentenced in
Federal court in North Carolina in 2013 to 6 years of imprisonment, followed by
5 years of supervised release.
4) In February 2009, when OIG special agents went to the home of a former USDA Food
Safety and Inspection Service employee to investigate threats the employee had
made to assault his former supervisor, they were met by the suspect brandishing an
assault weapon. The suspect retreated into his home, and OIG special agents
arrested him 3 days later. The individual was sentenced in December 2009 to serve
11 months of incarceration, followed by 2 years’ probation, and to pay a fine of
$1,000 for assaulting OIG special agents. After being released from incarceration,
the individual was stopped for a traffic violation and found to be unlawfully in
possession of a firearm.3

5) In April 2009, an off-duty OIG special agent in Arkansas assisted an elderly man who
had been robbed and assaulted. After securing medical attention for the victim, the
special agent confronted the suspect, who responded by shooting at the special agent five times with a revolver. No one was injured. While in jail awaiting
sentencing, the suspect threatened to kill the prosecutor, her family, and the
witnesses who testified against him. A search of the suspect’s cell revealed an 8-inch
metal shank hidden in his mattress. In October 2010, in Federal Court in Arkansas,
the defendant was convicted on felony counts of attempting to murder a Federal law
enforcement officer, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and using a firearm
during a crime of violence. He was sentenced to serve 40 years’ incarceration. He is
also wanted in connection with a total of six home invasions in Arkansas and
Indiana.
6) An OIG investigation determined that a farmer made threats against a USDA Farm
Service Agency (FSA) County Executive Director (CED) in rural Iowa. The farmer was
angry that FSA had not recognized his claim to leased land that the county court had
given to the farmer’s ex-wife in a divorce settlement. In a telephone conversation
with the CED, the farmer threatened to “blow away” the CED and the county
court. The farmer admitted to the OIG agent that he had made the statements to
the CED and also told the OIG agent that he could “blow you away” if he wanted
to. He said he wanted to get people’s attention and figured it had worked. The
farmer was charged in State court with making threats and harassment. When
arrested, he made further threatening statements to local law enforcement
officials. In May 2012, the farmer was found guilty by a jury, and in June was sentenced to 15 years in prison.
7) While a USDA APHIS Wildlife Service employee was carrying out his official duties in
Minnesota, he came under fire from a man with a handgun. OIG conducted an
investigation of the incident and, in October 2009, the Pine County (MN) County
Attorney’s Office charged the suspect with one count of intentional discharge of a
firearm and one count of intentionally pointing a gun at another person. In January
2011, the man pled guilty to one felony count of intentionally discharging a
firearm. Due to his extensive medical issues, he was sentenced to serve 120 days of
electronic home monitoring followed by 5 years’ probation. The subject is prohibited
from using/possessing firearms or dangerous weapons while on probation.
8) A 3-year joint operation conducted by OIG and several other law enforcement
entities resulted in the arrests of 51 people in March 2008 on charges of cockfighting,
gambling, and interstate transportation in aid of racketeering. As a result of this
investigation, law enforcement agents seized more than 50 firearms, 9.5 pounds of
methamphetamine, $125,000 in cash, over 2 pounds of cocaine, 5 pounds of
marijuana, and over 130 marijuana plants. To date, 42 defendants have pled guilty to
charges ranging from cockfighting to distribution of controlled substances, and have
received sentences ranging from fines to 14 years’ imprisonment.
9) In 2006, OIG initiated an investigation of an underground dogfighting and gambling
organization operating in Ohio, Kentucky, and Michigan. During 2007 - 2009, this
investigation resulted in the filing of charges against 55 individuals, 44 of whom have
pled guilty to charges involving violations of State and Federal laws prohibiting
dogfighting, possession of firearms, gambling, food stamp trafficking, and interstate
transportation of stolen vehicles. Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) fraud, wagering,
sale and use of narcotics, illegal firearms, and the sale of stolen property were
observed during the dogfights. Search warrants resulted in the seizure of pit bulls,
U.S. currency, marijuana, cocaine, firearms, a bulletproof vest with a ski mask, and a
warehouse full of dogfighting equipment and blood-stained fighting pits. The
investigation remains ongoing because three fugitives remain at large.
10) In October and November 2011, in Federal court in Michigan, two owners and
three employees of a convenience store in Lansing were sentenced to prison terms
ranging from 18 months to more than 16 years and were ordered to pay restitution
ranging from $215,800 to $496,000. The investigation by OIG and two other law
enforcement entities determined that these individuals were illegally accepting
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits in exchange for cash and
narcotics, including heroin and cocaine. In some cases, they also accepted SNAP
benefits in exchange for firearms. The owners and three employees were charged with a variety of crimes, including conspiracy; SNAP fraud; distribution of cocaine,
heroin, and marijuana; and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. All subjects
subsequently pled guilty.
11) OIG began Operation Talon in 1997 to locate and apprehend fugitives, many of
them violent offenders, who are current or former food stamp recipients. As of
March 31, 2014, Operation Talon had resulted in over 16,000 arrests of fugitive
felons during joint OIG-State and local law enforcement operations. OIG combines
forces with Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies to arrest fugitives for
offenses including assault, burglary, assorted drug charges, robbery, fraud, forgery,
driving under the influence, rape, sex offenses, offenses against family and children,
larceny, stolen property, weapons violations, and other offenses.


Now you can argue that the FBI could do all the various jobs if you want but that is a separate, and normally a pretty weak, argument. As it stands these are law enforcement and as such whining about them having the tools to do their job is pretty silly.

[mojo84]

Consider me silly then.

[bigity]

It seems if they are worried enough about an arrest/investigation to bring submachine guns, and have supporting factors that indicate a particular person(s) could be dangerous, they could contact another agency or bring a HTR team who is appropriately armed.

I'm not sure preemptively carrying around automatic weapons is the response to this list I guess is what I'm trying to say.

[anygunanywhere]

Of course the fed enforcers are going to make arrests. They get to use their toys, wear their tacticool skivvies, and flash their badges and yell at their intended victims. Also note that the suspected offenders are violating welfare rules made up by the same agency. Using their examples to justify their militarization does not work. As Mojo said, I will be silly.

[mojo84]

Those in government want government to grow in size, control, authority and power. Creating armed agents within the various areas of government helps accomplish all of those.

Before long, we'll have local building inspectors, permit department employees, health inspectors, ordinance enforcement employees, etc carrying guns and badges. They are enforcing laws and ordinances aren't they? You never know when a contractor, building owner, plumber or electrician may get mad and go off the handle over where a plumbing pipe is located or an illegal pigtail in the wiring.

How about the Texas Department of Insurance? They enforce laws. You never know when they may need to pistol whip a rogue insurance agent. How about IRS auditors? I bet some folks get pretty hot when sitting across from one of those fine folks when they are scrutinizing people private money affairs.

My point is, not every department or area of government needs their own police force, especially with automatic weapons, MRAP's and other military style weapons. This leads to many issues, some of which are waste from duplication, desire and tendency to use more force than necessary, bad relations between the government and mere citizens and further distrust of government. Have divisions of the government that are set up to handle making the arrests and executing the raids when necessary. Then each administrative department of the government can refer their cases to the law enforcement division for execution of an arrest, seizure or raid.

On the other hand, if guns and military style equipment is necessary to carry on such activities, maybe everyone should be allowed to carry their guns while working.

Show me the head of any government agency that recommended, without being coerced and forced, to reduce their budget, workforce, authority, power or eliminate their department in total. There may be one out there. I haven't come across him or her yet.


Dang, sorry about the soapbox rant. Kind of pulled my chain.

[EEllis]

Consider me silly then.

Not all the time but sometimes. But then we all have our own blinders I guess.

[EEllis]

It seems if they are worried enough about an arrest/investigation to bring submachine guns, and have supporting factors that indicate a particular person(s) could be dangerous, they could contact another agency or bring a HTR team who is appropriately armed.

I'm not sure preemptively carrying around automatic weapons is the response to this list I guess is what I'm trying to say.

And what makes you believe they will be? Purchasing such things would allow the agents to have access to such weaponry but it doesn't indicate anything more than that.

[EEllis]

Of course the fed enforcers are going to make arrests. They get to use their toys, wear their tacticool skivvies, and flash their badges and yell at their intended victims. Also note that the suspected offenders are violating welfare rules made up by the same agency. Using their examples to justify their militarization does not work. As Mojo said, I will be silly.

So wait a minute now the complaint is that they will actually be doing their jobs and that law enforcement will arrest people? The problem is they may enjoy it? Mind you the laws are actually made up by the legislature and they aren't generally going after grandma who bought something she shouldn't but stores and organizations that defraud the public for millions of dollars not to mention the animal fighting rings, criminal assaults on government employees, etc.

[EEllis]

Those in government want government to grow in size, control, authority and power. Creating armed agents within the various areas of government helps accomplish all of those.

Before long, we'll have local building inspectors, permit department employees, health inspectors, ordinance enforcement employees, etc carrying guns and badges. They are enforcing laws and ordinances aren't they? You never know when a contractor, building owner, plumber or electrician may get mad and go off the handle over where a plumbing pipe is located or an illegal pigtail in the wiring.

Code violations are not criminal violations. If they were then yes they should be armed. For the most part they already have badges.
It's kind of funny that someone on this board is advocating people be disarmed. Here is the tipping point to me. If they can arrest you on the spot, which building inspectors can't do, for a violation within their purview, then I'm ok with them being law enforcement. You worry about who they work for I worry about the job that they do.

How about the Texas Department of Insurance? They enforce laws. You never know when they may need to pistol whip a rogue insurance agent. How about IRS auditors? I bet some folks get pretty hot when sitting across from one of those fine folks when they are scrutinizing people private money affairs.

What the whole Department should be a cop? Or why should someone like a State fire investigator who would investigate things like arson be law enforcement?

My point is, not every department or area of government needs their own police force, especially with automatic weapons, MRAP's and other military style weapons. This leads to many issues, some of which are waste from duplication, desire and tendency to use more force than necessary, bad relations between the government and mere citizens and further distrust of government. Have divisions of the government that are set up to handle making the arrests and executing the raids when necessary. Then each administrative department of the government can refer their cases to the law enforcement division for execution of an arrest, seizure or raid.

So you are not really complaining about the number or specilazation of law enforcement just who pays them. At least that is the logic you use but I haven't seen you complain about having a city and county law enforcement? Heck we should just have one Texas police force and have no smaller groups at all right? But wait a second that just doesn't sound right does it.

[bigity]

It seems if they are worried enough about an arrest/investigation to bring submachine guns, and have supporting factors that indicate a particular person(s) could be dangerous, they could contact another agency or bring a HTR team who is appropriately armed.

I'm not sure preemptively carrying around automatic weapons is the response to this list I guess is what I'm trying to say.

And what makes you believe they will be? Purchasing such things would allow the agents to have access to such weaponry but it doesn't indicate anything more than that.

And what prevents them from using other LEO agencies who might be a tad better trained in such things? I guess then you might need to have a little smaller government.

[EEllis]

It seems if they are worried enough about an arrest/investigation to bring submachine guns, and have supporting factors that indicate a particular person(s) could be dangerous, they could contact another agency or bring a HTR team who is appropriately armed.

I'm not sure preemptively carrying around automatic weapons is the response to this list I guess is what I'm trying to say.

And what makes you believe they will be? Purchasing such things would allow the agents to have access to such weaponry but it doesn't indicate anything more than that.

And what prevents them from using other LEO agencies who might be a tad better trained in such things? I guess then you might need to have a little smaller government.

Better trained on that particular firearm and it's usage or better trained to investigate the crime that they are working? Right now I don't really get your argument. There is nothing to suggest having the FBI do all federal law enforcement would do a thing to shrink the govt. Every position would just get switched to the FBI then lent right back out doubling the FBI size but make little other difference. Heck it would be more likely to add size because instead of just sending out armed inspectors or investigators now every dept would have to pair such workers with armed FBI agents. Then there would be the delay and inefficiency inherent in trying to coordinate between different agencies. I just don't get the Pollyanna belief that it would matter.