mojo84 wrote: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.
It's obvious you just want to argue and shoot holes in what people say.
My point was clear. We don't need separate police forces for each department of government. I know that is hard for you big government government is always right guys fathom bit that is what I believe. Nothing you say here will change that.
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.
anygunanywhere wrote: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.
Not gonna get in a circle logic argument with you. Of course the agencies are going after citizens who break their rules. That is what they do. Don't confuse all of this with actual law enforcement though. They can just as easily SWAT you for a code violation, improper deduction, or rule (not law) infraction.
Done.
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh
"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
could it be that the government is doing things (food stamps and other examples in this thread) that it has no business doing and then having to have well armed goon squads as enforcers when their utopian plan doesn't execute according to script?
mojo84 wrote: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.
It's obvious you just want to argue and shoot holes in what people say.
My point was clear. We don't need separate police forces for each department of government. I know that is hard for you big government government is always right guys fathom bit that is what I believe. Nothing you say here will change that.
No offense but the reason I'm not changing my mind is because you haven't made a decent argument. You say we don't need cops for every dept and I agree. The ones that do need LE capabilities could utilize the FYI or others when needed. While I would agree that it's possible you have never made the argument for why your vision of the way things should be is preferable. One federal department handling all LE duties could cause even larger govt, more people employed, much less effect and responsive to the seperate tasks. You then utilize a tactic that in debate is called a logical fallacy. You insult me by calling me a big government guy. Never mind that I sure don't think that I am and you don't even bother to define what that is or how you can label me as such. You then can dismiss my arguments without addressing the points because they came from a "big gov guy". Hey if there are just to many different types of cop and it makes you feel uncomfortable that's fine but don't get worked up when challenged for incomplete arguments. Your argument is incomplete at best because nothing you state should lead anyone to believe removing police powers from the relatively small groups would have any effect on size or efficiency in any positive way.
mayor wrote:could it be that the government is doing things (food stamps and other examples in this thread) that it has no business doing and then having to have well armed goon squads as enforcers when their utopian plan doesn't execute according to script?
mojo84 wrote: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.
It's obvious you just want to argue and shoot holes in what people say.
My point was clear. We don't need separate police forces for each department of government. I know that is hard for you big government government is always right guys fathom bit that is what I believe. Nothing you say here will change that.
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors. ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
SNIP...
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Private Investigators are peace officers? Don't care for that.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
SNIP...
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Private Investigators are peace officers? Don't care for that.
There is a way to obtain your peace officers license through the TxDPS PSB. But I've never met one, their use is of limited supply I suppose. Maybe a security guard or instructor knows more on that then I, I just have my Level II & III licenses, but I plan on getting my Level IV PPO before long. Who knows, maybe being a private security investigator with the powers of a peace officer would be a fun retirement gig!
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors. ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
SNIP...
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Private Investigators are peace officers? Don't care for that.
There is a way to obtain your peace officers license through the TxDPS PSB. But I've never met one, their use is of limited supply I suppose. Maybe a security guard or instructor knows more on that then I, I just have my Level II & III licenses, but I plan on getting my Level IV PPO before long. Who knows, maybe being a private security investigator with the powers of a peace officer would be a fun retirement gig!
I did some quick Googling. I don't think Private Security can be peace officers. It looks like the Commission (gov't entity) that administers Private Security in Texas can hire (commission) peace officers for Commission work needs.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
SNIP...
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Private Investigators are peace officers? Don't care for that.
There is a way to obtain your peace officers license through the TxDPS PSB. But I've never met one, their use is of limited supply I suppose. Maybe a security guard or instructor knows more on that then I, I just have my Level II & III licenses, but I plan on getting my Level IV PPO before long. Who knows, maybe being a private security investigator with the powers of a peace officer would be a fun retirement gig!
I did some quick Googling. I don't think Private Security can be peace officers. It looks like the Commission (gov't entity) that administers Private Security in Texas can hire (commission) peace officers for Commission work needs.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
SNIP...
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Private Investigators are peace officers? Don't care for that.
There is a way to obtain your peace officers license through the TxDPS PSB. But I've never met one, their use is of limited supply I suppose. Maybe a security guard or instructor knows more on that then I, I just have my Level II & III licenses, but I plan on getting my Level IV PPO before long. Who knows, maybe being a private security investigator with the powers of a peace officer would be a fun retirement gig!
I did some quick Googling. I don't think Private Security can be peace officers. It looks like the Commission (gov't entity) that administers Private Security in Texas can hire (commission) peace officers for Commission work needs.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
SNIP...
Do you know how many different peace officer categories their are in Texas? Last time I tried to count we got around 170+. Postal inspector, fire marshall, dental examiner, state trooper, city marshall, parole officer, bailiff, private investigator, airport police, port police, etc. Every agency in Texas that can arrest you for some sort of violation or crime, has their own people to do it. (Or most of them anyway.) If we only needed one type of agency to cover it all, a lot of things would get overlooked, even on the state level. Same goes on the federal level. The FBI has enough to work on, let alone executing warrants and seizures of animal registration papers and finance reports. Big agency = big government. More small agencies with certain specialties = more thorough work, and less to try and prioritize.
Private Investigators are peace officers? Don't care for that.
There is a way to obtain your peace officers license through the TxDPS PSB. But I've never met one, their use is of limited supply I suppose. Maybe a security guard or instructor knows more on that then I, I just have my Level II & III licenses, but I plan on getting my Level IV PPO before long. Who knows, maybe being a private security investigator with the powers of a peace officer would be a fun retirement gig!
I did some quick Googling. I don't think Private Security can be peace officers. It looks like the Commission (gov't entity) that administers Private Security in Texas can hire (commission) peace officers for Commission work needs.
There can be a few instances where a investigator can have the powers of, and be a peace officer. Look at #28 for example.
Too far off topic now, we'll stop this conversation here.
That is an investigator for the commission, not a private investigator. I see nothing to suggest a PI can be a peace officer. OK, I'll stop now....
You're probably right, it wouldn't be the first time I misinterpreted something! I would like to hope not though, I met a academy instructor who said the same thing once. Might've seen it somewhere else, but it's probably my imagination.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors. ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.
Charlies.Contingency wrote:
You're probably right, it wouldn't be the first time I misinterpreted something! I would like to hope not though, I met a academy instructor who said the same thing once. Might've seen it somewhere else, but it's probably my imagination.
You can be security and have the powers and legally be defined as a peace officer "while on duty" if you are commissioned by a political subdivision of the Govt. Example that actually exist would be commissioned security that work for a hospital district. Not that work for a hospital but that work for a county hospital district and that the district itself licences thru the State as commissioned security officers. It's called by the State a GLOA commissioned officer. AFAIK only Harris county appraisal district and the hospital district carry commissioned officers here in Houston but by definition they are peace officers when working. Did you know there was a city of Dallas security force? Yep. don't know a thing about them but don't let the name make you think you can ignore them if you do come across them.
