IRS Acquiring Shotguns

[Pete]

Acquiring Shotguns

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=8d3b076bd4de14bbda5aba699e80621d&tab=core&_cview=1&cck=1&au=&ck=

"......The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) intends to purchase sixty Remington Model 870 Police RAMAC #24587 12 gauge pump-action shotguns for the Criminal Investigation Division..........."

Just some more fodder for the tinfoil hat crowd?

So the IRS is going to get into doorkickin'?

I'm from the government and I'm here to help?

[Sten]

IRS trap and skeet team?

[Utah Bob]

Actually the IRS enforcement folks deal with some fairly nasty people at times.
I know some of the right leaning blogs are flipping out, but they already have shotguns in their inventory.

The Remington parkerized shotguns, with fourteen inch barrel, modified choke, Wilson Combat Ghost Ring rear sight and XS4 Contour Bead front sight, Knoxx Reduced Recoil Adjustable Stock, and Speedfeed ribbed black forend, are designated as the only shotguns authorized for IRS duty based on compatibility with IRS existing shotgun inventory, certified armorer and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts.

[Team Sergeant]

Everyone else in the US government has guns why not the IRS?;)

This is probably a good time for the Dept of Education, Department of Commerce, Department of Human Services, Department of Labor and the CDC "Enforcement Divisions" to "kit-up" and get some good purchases on weapons and equipment.:rolleyes:

[dadof18x'er]

Actually the IRS enforcement folks deal with some fairly nasty people at times.
I know some of the right leaning blogs are flipping out, but they already have shotguns in their inventory.

is a 14 " barrel a stock item? I thought 18" was the shortest.

[Utah Bob]

is a 14 " barrel a stock item? I thought 18" was the shortest.

Only available to military and police.

[Utah Bob]

Remember what Al Capone went to jail for?;)

[craigepo]

With the money I send them every year, why are they going the cheap route with 870's, when they could buy benelli's?

IRS with shotguns. I wonder if the little green accountant visors are part of their tactical gear.

[Go Devil]

Ah, the good ol' days.....

Revenuers.

Isn't the ATF the enforcement wing of the IRS?

[Utah Bob]

With the money I send them every year, why are they going the cheap route with 870's, when they could buy benelli's?

IRS with shotguns. I wonder if the little green accountant visors are part of their tactical gear.

You can't rack the slide on a Benelli for proper intimidation effect. :rolleyes:

[Utah Bob]

Ah, the good ol' days.....

Revenuers.

Isn't the ATF the enforcement wing of the IRS?

No.
IRS Enforcement (http://jobs.irs.gov/car_law_cisaMn.html)

[ZonieDiver]

Everyone else in the US government has guns why not the IRS?;)

This is probably a good time for the Dept of Education, Department of Commerce, Department of Human Services, Department of Labor and the CDC "Enforcement Divisions" to "kit-up" and get some good purchases on weapons and equipment.:rolleyes:

Damn! There's my retirement job!!!! Department of Education, Enforcement Division.

<sound of door being kicked in>

<sound of Remington 870 with 14" barrel being racked>

There I stand in my tactical gear, with shotgun, and red grading pen resting over my left ear.

"Let me see those lesson plans, and let me see them NOW!"

I'm in.... Can Richard be my Team Leader? :D

[Snaquebite]

Last year while still working for Paraclete, I had to go out to different IRS offices and measure agents for concealment vests. This ranged from office personnel to enforcement, "raid teams", and undercover agents.

One guy walked in the room and I almost fell over. My 72 inch measuring tape was 4 inches short reaching around his waist. I guess it was part of his disguise as he worked undercover. :lifter

The office joke was to fit this guy we were going to cut down a ballistic blanket with a neck hole and hook him up with a "ballistic poncho".

[Richard]

Remington?

I prefer my half-Century old Winchester Model 25 12 ga. pump w/2.75" chamber and full choke - the sound of the slide jacking a round into the chamber will make you stop and carefully consider your next move. ;)

The old Winchester Model 1200/1300s with those long bayonets we had for riot control back when were ass kickers, too.

Richard

[Team Sergeant]

Remington?

I prefer my half-Century old Winchester Model 25 12 ga. pump w/2.75" chamber and full choke - the sound of the slide jacking a round into the chamber will make you stop and carefully consider your next move. ;)
The old Winchester Model 1200/1300s with those long bayonets we had for riot control back when were ass kickers, too.

Richard

I keep mine loaded, I much prefer to sound of flesh hitting the floor.;)

[Richard]

I keep mine loaded, I much prefer the sound of flesh hitting the floor.

<grin> Oh...mine's loaded - I just don't keep a shell in the chamber - maybe it's because I live in Far North Dallas and not around Phoenix. ;)

Richard

[Team Sergeant]

Hey Pete you have a PM!!!!!

[armymom1228]

I keep mine loaded, I much prefer to sound of flesh hitting the floor.;)

My mom has the same attitude..

Originally Posted by Richard
the sound of the slide jacking a round into the chamber will make you stop and carefully consider your next move.
Richard

Especially if it is the hands of a 90 yr old five foot tall woman. I thought I was dead, I got exactly 12 feet inside Mom's house before I heard that sound and her saying "HOLD! don't move. I am calling the police."... holy crap, I nearly peed myself. "MOM! MOM! it's me, Anne, MOM???? It's Anne!! holy bat crap Mom! put that thing down!" Next time her grandkids are worried about her, THEY can go check on her.

[Utah Bob]

Remington?

I prefer my half-Century old Winchester Model 25 12 ga. pump w/2.75" chamber and full choke - the sound of the slide jacking a round into the chamber will make you stop and carefully consider your next move. ;)
Well, in a rational thinking person anyway. Dirtbags not so much sometimes.:D

The old Winchester Model 1200/1300s with those long bayonets we had for riot control back when were ass kickers, too.

Richard

:D

Trench guns rock!

[mojaveman]

The old Winchester Model 1200/1300s with those long bayonets we had for riot control back when were ass kickers, too.

Richard

I got to carry the M1200 when I was a kid in USAREUR. Loaded with buckshot it's a comfortable feeling having one of those in your hands. It's only fault was the barrel heat shield that was made from thin metal and that broke easily.

[JJ_BPK]

is a 14 " barrel a stock item? I thought 18" was the shortest.

And then there is the 6.5 inch barrel Super Shorty..

http://www.serbu.com/top/superShorty.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uovL9I2iQmM

[dadof18x'er]

And then there is the 6.5 inch barrel Super Shorty..

http://www.serbu.com/top/superShorty.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uovL9I2iQmM



$705....I guess less really is more:D

[Sigaba]

Just some more fodder for the tinfoil hat crowd?At the risk of fanning the flames that warm the tinfoil hats and cook the heads beneath, I would point to what happened to Jim Baker and wonder. <<LINK1 (http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/04/30/irs.hearings/)>> and <<LINK2 (http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/01/us/staff-says-irs-concealed-improper-audits-and-rogue-agent.html?pagewanted=1&pagewanted=print)>>

[The Reaper]

is a 14 " barrel a stock item? I thought 18" was the shortest.

Not if you are Feds or LE.

Sounds like they might be planning to raid a Cabinet meeting or a czar gathering and round up some back taxes.

TR

[The Reaper]

This just raises quick question, but if one has a 12 gauge and thinks an intruder is in their home, should they put on earplugs/coverings? I have read that the sound of a 12 gauge firing in doors can permanently make one deaf, is this true?

The deafness from firing the 12 gauge should be significantly less than the deafness acquired from being shot by one.

Seriously, I would think that if you have a shotgun and are preparing to shoot at someone in your home, possible long-term hearing loss is probably not at the top of your list of concerns. I wouldn't worry about it.

TR

[Richard]

This just raises quick question, but if one has a 12 gauge and thinks an intruder is in their home, should they put on earplugs/coverings? I have read that the sound of a 12 gauge firing in doors can permanently make one deaf, is this true?

1. Hearing protection is the least of your worries if an intruder is in your home.

2. All it has given me is tinnitus - not deafness - and it hasn't affected my vision or resolve one iota.

Think about it.

Richard

[HowardCohodas]

Anyone ever think what they might do in response to the execution of a no-knock warrant on their premises. Think it would never happen to you? Well, mistakes have been made by misidentifying the property.

What brought this to mind is that I have had several run-ins with the IRS. I eventually won most of the battles, but they once did take funds from my wife's savings account and try to garnishee her wages. All because an IRS clerk misread a box on a 1099. I'm doing my best not to be called "Tin-Foil-Hat Howard," although it does have nice alliteration. :D

[The Reaper]

Thanks; over at another forum where they were discussing firearms, someone said when fired indoors, the 12-gauge can ruin one's hearing and that a cop made himself deaf firing one in doors.

Only if there is a workman's comp/disability claim involved.:rolleyes:

TR

[HowardCohodas]

When you say "no-knock warrant," you mean like the IRS breaks into a home with a SWAT-team with no warning?

Sort of. I'm using the IRS as a proxy for any no-knock warrant situation. I'm assuming, but have not investigated, that the IRS deals with some pretty bad people and could possibly end up with that authority. What really interests me is, What would you do in the receiving end of a no-knock situation, especially in a castle doctrine state? This subject came up in one of my CCP classes, and I had not good answer.

[swatsurgeon]

broadsword2004.....
Google is an amazing invention, really. We take the theoretical, practical and absurd and attempt to make sense of our induced reality, i.e., discharging a weapon (12Gauge) inside of a house. For educational purposes, follow the link. There are several factors that go into answering your question: proximity to the weapon, size of the room, contents of the room...bare walls and no carpet is going to be worse than one with sound absorbing things all over the place, your personal stress level with applied auditory exclusion and valsalva........you get my point.
http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/noise.asp

ss

[HowardCohodas]

This just raises quick question, but if one has a 12 gauge and thinks an intruder is in their home, should they put on earplugs/coverings? I have read that the sound of a 12 gauge firing in doors can permanently make one deaf, is this true?

Part of what we teach in the module dealing with a post-SD incident is preparedness and actions to take to avoid NIHL. (Noise Induced Hearing Loss) The NIH has some studies on ameliorating therapy when you are exposed to loud noise unprotected by earplugs. I carry aspirin and Vitamin E with me always based on some of this research.

[JAGO]

Anyone ever think what they might do in response to the execution of a no-knock warrant on their premises. Think it would never happen to you? Well, mistakes have been made by misidentifying the property.

What brought this to mind is that I have had several run-ins with the IRS. I eventually won most of the battles, but they once did take funds from my wife's savings account and try to garnishee her wages. All because an IRS clerk misread a box on a 1099. I'm doing my best not to be called "Tin-Foil-Hat Howard," although it does have nice alliteration. :D

HowardCohodas,

Knock and announce springs from the common law that requies they announce their presence and provide citizens an opportunity to open their door. Fed LEOs follow 18 USC 3109 (the "knock and announce" statute) and it includes exigigent circumstances provisions that allow Fed LEOs to dispense with the requirements of 3109. If the federal Magistrate Judge issues a "no-knock" or if exigent circumstances develop while attempting to execute the warrant, Fed LEOs dispense with the "knock" requirement - however the "announce" requirement is still there and its use is a matter of survival. We train FLEOs on the risk of no-knocks and tactics to use so as not to get shot, whether by a felon, or a surprised and innocent homeowner.

So at 3 a.m. when the dynamic entry starts, the Fed LEOs still yell upon entry into the home "Fed agents with a warrant "(can be search or arrest).

You as the home owner are now on the spot. For instance, Houston, TX has had gang members dressed in SWAT gear doing home invasions. Has that happened in your area? If so, you may be justified in protecting yourself. It will all depend upon the facts.

My inclination is that the courts will go back to the Graham v. Connor standard that is used in analysis of all use of force cases. Were the actions of the homeowner objectively reasonable, under all the facts and circumstances presented? The courts don't look at what could have been known, only at what was known at the precise moment force was applied. If prior to the use of force, you were previously arrested and skipped out on bond, it is a pretty sure bet that your door being busted down by people who then yell "feds", then they probably are there to put the habeas grabass on you and you use force at your peril. My bet is you will go down for shooting. But if however, you are an everyday person, not involved with any improper activity, and the feds have made a mistake and got the address wrong, and then they break into your house and you shoot them, well that action may be objectively reasonable based upon the totality of the circumstances.

Training people in use of force, we spent a lot of time on "blue and blue" situations. Good IPB is a must.
While I agree with Team Sergeant and like the sound of flesh hitting the ground, I have a .223 w/ 30 rounds for home protection along with .45 back up, and if I can get to a POD and safely call for a badge, I will. However, I won't hesitate to go to guns if to hesitate is to be doomed. In Florida, I can protect my home as my castle and cops executing a no-knock do so at their own risk.

v/r
phil

[craigepo]

The odds of law enforcement executing a no-knock warrant on your house are pretty low. It's a pretty high standard to get a search warrant, and even higher to get a no-knock search warrant.

In addition to other factors, when obtaining a search warrant, law enforcement must specify the precise property they wish to search. "Some house on Elm Street" doesn't work. Often, there will be legal descriptions, 911 addresses, maps, and specific map locations attached to the warrant request.

Stated differently, when law enforcement executes a search warrant, they have proven to a neutral magistrate that there is probably an ongoing felony within that specific building. While there are no doubt screw-ups, professional law enforcement officers take their job seriously, and do a good job of chasing bad guys while protecting good guys.

[HowardCohodas]

The odds of law enforcement executing a no-knock warrant on your house are pretty low. It's a pretty high standard to get a search warrant, and even higher to get a no-knock search warrant.

In addition to other factors, when obtaining a search warrant, law enforcement must specify the precise property they wish to search. "Some house on Elm Street" doesn't work. Often, there will be legal descriptions, 911 addresses, maps, and specific map locations attached to the warrant request.

Stated differently, when law enforcement executes a search warrant, they have proven to a neutral magistrate that there is probably an ongoing felony within that specific building. While there are no doubt screw-ups, professional law enforcement officers take their job seriously, and do a good job of chasing bad guys while protecting good guys.

Just as I estimate the probability of ever being in a SD situation requiring the use of my firearms to be very low, I also estimate the probability of LE using a "no-knock" warrant on me to be very low.

That said, you don't need much prowess with an internet search engine, or much time as an instructor before you hear about "mistakes in identifying the proper residence" resulting in the deaths of the occupants. You make your own call. I've made mine.

[HowardCohodas]

However, I won't hesitate to go to guns if to hesitate is to be doomed. In Florida, I can protect my home as my castle and cops executing a no-knock do so at their own risk.

v/r
phil

Can I put you in my "keep my ass out of jail" list in case of a SD incident? :D

Seriously, thanks for a good analysis of this question that a layman can understand. It was exactly what I was looking for with my question. I will use the information personally and with appropriate precautions to prepare by seeking licensed counsel when the question comes up in the classes I teach.

[JAGO]

The odds of law enforcement executing a no-knock warrant on your house are pretty low. It's a pretty high standard to get a search warrant, and even higher to get a no-knock search warrant.

In addition to other factors, when obtaining a search warrant, law enforcement must specify the precise property they wish to search. "Some house on Elm Street" doesn't work. Often, there will be legal descriptions, 911 addresses, maps, and specific map locations attached to the warrant request.

Stated differently, when law enforcement executes a search warrant, they have proven to a neutral magistrate that there is probably an ongoing felony within that specific building. While there are no doubt screw-ups, professional law enforcement officers take their job seriously, and do a good job of chasing bad guys while protecting good guys.

craigepo,

I am not taking issue, I'm only saying... Agree, the odds are slim to none.

Agree the warrant must specify the place to be searched and the items to be seized. General warrants and Writs of Assistance are not allowed.

And, I would hope that the odds of LE executing a no-K on my home are zero. But Murphy (or rather Bivens v 6 Unk Agents of the Bureau of Nacotics) is still out there. I recall officers using the wrong address in a murder investigation I was involved in. It happens and there is lots of case law used to teach FLEOs in the hopes of them avoiding future mistakes.

While states can, and some do have a higher standard, in the federal system in order to obtain a S/W the agent must have PC. In Gates, the USSC said something to the effect that they can't quantify probable cause, but P/C is less than a preponderence of the evidence (less than 50.001%). IS there evidence of a crime (misd or felony) and is evidence of that crime now in the place to be searched?


Under 18 USC 3109 exceptionss allow federal officers to dispense with the knock and announce provisions include, danger to officers and 3d parties, a suspect's significant crim history of violence, destruction of evidence, etc.

Under the federal system we don't have to prove there is an ongoing felony in the place to be searched, only that some crime has transpired and some evidence of that crime is at that location, now.

Agree we all have raid plans, maps, sketches, (hopefully) photographs, directions that a reasonable LEO can follow to the location, GPS, etc. but cases abound where a "N" was typed instead of an "S" or "352" came out "253". Hopefully a description avoids that, but in cookied cutter subdivisions all the houses look the same.

Overall the system is pretty good for the system we got, but one should be prepared in the event of an emergency. My family plans for a house fire (good chance) hurricane (fair chance) tornado (slight chance) and I have a couple of firearms at the ready in the event someone uninvited enters my home (chance probably mid-way between hurricane and tornado). Not saying it would be LE, as that chance is slight to none, but I am prepared for the burglar and in my case, there is no ongoing criminal activity unless you count UCMJ charges for the ocassional crime against nature!

Reasonableness would require that I given a chance to come to the door.

v/r
phil

[wet dog]

Only available to military and police.

...and my bandsaw.


My question is, why does the IRS need weapons?

Can not local LE do the tough work, while the IRS, say, 'pushes papers around'.

Not that long ago, another govt. agency was taken from the back office and made into cops, (Lawyers, Accountants), the learning curve was pretty steep for them as well.

[jw74]

Not much cause to tighten the chin strap on your tin foil hat IMO. Postal service has a LEO division too. Im no fan of the IRS but this is a non story.

[Utah Bob]

...and my bandsaw.


My question is, why does the IRS need weapons?

Can not local LE do the tough work, while the IRS, say, 'pushes papers around'.

Not that long ago, another govt. agency was taken from the back office and made into cops, (Lawyers, Accountants), the learning curve was pretty steep for them as well.

The law enforcement division of the irs has trained, certified LE agents. Training is similar. As they do deal with some nasty organized crime types they need to have the capability to deal with armed confrontations. Apparently the Russian mafia guys seldom file returns. On most high risk warrants they would use a tac unit from another agency for initial entry. Sometimes local agencies do not play real well with feds however and Fed tac units are spread pretty thin.
Since the Miami FBI shootout, Feds have been a little more attentive to worst case scenarios.
Like they say, Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.

Now where's that 10-40a form? I need to get to work on that...;)

[wet dog]

Not much cause to tighten the chin strap on your tin foil hat IMO. Postal service has a LEO division too. Im no fan of the IRS but this is a non story.

OK, after reading Utah Bob's comments, I understand the IRS thing.

But, the postal service as a LE division? Tell me why, this must be simply a front door security element.

What next, FedEx, UPS - Freight Security Enforcement Officers, (FSEO).

Wait, I've got a better one, FedEX - Security Health Information Transportation, (SHIT) Team.

I know it's nothing new, 1800's, the RR hired Pinkerton Security to watch private property.

[JAGO]

OK, after reading Utah Bob's comments, I understand the IRS thing.

But, the postal service as a LE division? Tell me why, this must be simply a front door security element.

What next, FedEx, UPS - Freight Security Enforcement Officers, (FSEO).

Wait, I've got a better one, FedEX - Security Health Information Transportation, (SHIT) Team.

I know it's nothing new, 1800's, the RR hired Pinkerton Security to watch private property.

wet dog,

We had 86 federal agencies with law enforcement functions pass thru the federal law enforcement training center! I see (and agree) with your point.

But please let me say in regards to US postal inspectors and their service,
the establishment of a post office and postal roads is an enumerated constitutional function, unlike many other areas the federal government has entered. Huge amounts of criminal activity is conducted thru the US mails and their law enfocement authrotiy is well grounded. Post offices have been huge conduits for funds and resources. Many a post office and postal express has been robbed.

I have seen US postal inspectors' work during joint investigations, and it is top notch. From several mail bombing cases, to (international) drug shipments arriving through the mail, to frauds, and many of the subjects involved in those investigations were armed.

The inspectorion service is not a mailman with a gun.

v/r
phil

[wet dog]

wet dog,

We had 86 federal agencies with law enforcement functions pass thru the federal law enforcement training center! I see (and agree) with your point.

But please let me say in regards to US postal inspectors and their service,
the establishment of a post office and postal roads is an enumerated constitutional function, unlike many other areas the federal government has entered. Huge amounts of criminal activity is conducted thru the US mails and their law enfocement authrotiy is well grounded. Post offices have been huge conduits for funds and resources. Many a post office and postal express has been robbed.

I have seen US postal inspectors' work during joint investigations, and it is top notch. From several mail bombing cases, to (international) drug shipments arriving through the mail, to frauds, and many of the subjects involved in those investigations were armed.

The inspectorion service is not a mailman with a gun.

v/r
phil


I'm going back into my warm , safe, protected "Bubble", where I don't see the wrongs of the world, place my two index fingers in my ears and say loudly, "La, la, la, la , la", repeatively.

My hometown Postal Service office still has a wooden sidewalk and hitching post, the front door is never locked, and a single lamp light swings in the breeze.

WD

[jw74]

OK, after reading Utah Bob's comments, I understand the IRS thing.

But, the postal service as a LE division? Tell me why, this must be simply a front door security element.

What next, FedEx, UPS - Freight Security Enforcement Officers, (FSEO).

Wait, I've got a better one, FedEX - Security Health Information Transportation, (SHIT) Team.

I know it's nothing new, 1800's, the RR hired Pinkerton Security to watch private property.

I believe they are 1811's like FBI, DEA, etc

http://www.uspsoig.gov/investigation.htm

[greenberetTFS]

Damn! There's my retirement job!!!! Department of Education, Enforcement Division.

<sound of door being kicked in>

<sound of Remington 870 with 14" barrel being racked>

There I stand in my tactical gear, with shotgun, and red grading pen resting over my left ear.

"Let me see those lesson plans, and let me see them NOW!"

I'm in.... Can Richard be my Team Leader?

Excellent idea ZD,I'm in and Richard will jump at a chance to lead us.......:D:D:D

Big Teddy :munchin

[AngelsSix]

The deafness from firing the 12 gauge should be significantly less than the deafness acquired from being shot by one.

Seriously, I would think that if you have a shotgun and are preparing to shoot at someone in your home, possible long-term hearing loss is probably not at the top of your list of concerns. I wouldn't worry about it.

TR

I have fired the 870 without hearing protection in order to find out what it would be like if I actually had to use the damn thing, your ear will ring for a while, but it isn't too bad.;)

[AngelsSix]

I'm going back into my warm , safe, protected "Bubble", where I don't see the wrongs of the world, place my two index fingers in my ears and say loudly, "La, la, la, la , la", repeatively.

My hometown Postal Service office still has a wooden sidewalk and hitching post, the front door is never locked, and a single lamp light swings in the breeze.

WD

Where do you live, I want to move there!!:lifter

[JAGO]

Where do you live, I want to move there!!:lifter
A6,
Check profile, wd is in God's country;)

v/r
phil

[Leozinho]

Just as I estimate the probability of ever being in a SD situation requiring the use of my firearms to be very low, I also estimate the probability of LE using a "no-knock" warrant on me to be very low.

That said, you don't need much prowess with an internet search engine, or much time as an instructor before you hear about "mistakes in identifying the proper residence" resulting in the deaths of the occupants. You make your own call. I've made mine..


I estimate the probability of LE executing a no-knock warrant on your domicile by accident to be statistically insignificant. I also estimate the probability of you surviving the no knock warrant (executed in error or otherwise) after you've shown intent to use deadly force to be very low, too.



What's this call you've made? To defend your house to the death under the Castle Doctrine? I don't understand your thought process. Is your concern a home invasion under the guise of a warrant? Or are you worried about being killed by LE in a warrant? If it's the latter, you better drop any of this phony idea of defending your domicile at all costs. You'd might kill an innocent LEO and more likely you'll get yourself killed.

You teach self defense? To whom? You need to tell your students that when the police are coming through the door first to cease all movement and then follow directions that are given.

[Leozinho]

I believe they are 1811's like FBI, DEA, etc

http://www.uspsoig.gov/investigation.htm

You are correct. They are 1811s trained at FLETC in the same basic criminal investigator training program as ATF, ICE, US Marshals, USSS and almost all the other Fed 1811s except FBI, DEA and US Postal Inspectors (which have their own training programs). As someone said, this was a non-story.

[Pete]

.....You teach self defense? To whom? You need to tell your students that when the police are coming through the door first to cease all movement and then follow directions that are given.

Six different guys screaming "Police - Search Warrant" sounds like six guys screaming.

So Joe Six Pack is jolted out of a sound sleep by the sound of his front door being kicked in and a number of screaming dark clad individuals running down his hallway.

"Oh, look honey, it's the local police force serving a no-knock warrant."

Yeah, right. I think the practice might be a bit overused.

[HowardCohodas]

I have fired the 870 without hearing protection in order to find out what it would be like if I actually had to use the damn thing, your ear will ring for a while, but it isn't too bad.;)

I do not recommend any exposure to loud noise, including rock bands without both hearing protection and the prophylactic consumption of nutrients known to ameliorate NIHL. When unexpectedly exposed to loud noise, for example a SD incident, taking those same nutrients withing an hour will also ameliorate permanent damage.

Reference: NIHL (http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/noise.asp)

[Sierra Bravo]

Hmmm... so are they writing this off on taxes as a biz expense?:p

[Pete]

Hmmm... so are they writing this off on taxes as a biz expense?:p

Tax payers are footing the bill - that means the government thinks its free.

[Animal8526]

Six different guys screaming "Police - Search Warrant" sounds like six guys screaming.

So Joe Six Pack is jolted out of a sound sleep by the sound of his front door being kicked in and a number of screaming dark clad individuals running down his hallway.

"Oh, look honey, it's the local police force serving a no-knock warrant."

Yeah, right. I think the practice might be a bit overused.

Bingo. look up "ryan frederick".

[HowardCohodas]

I estimate the probability of LE executing a no-knock warrant on your domicile by accident to be statistically insignificant. I also estimate the probability of you surviving the no knock warrant (executed in error or otherwise) after you've shown intent to use deadly force to be very low, too.


What's this call you've made? To defend your house to the death under the Castle Doctrine? I don't understand your thought process. Is your concern a home invasion under the guise of a warrant? Or are you worried about being killed by LE in a warrant? If it's the latter, you better drop any of this phony idea of defending your domicile at all costs. You'd might kill an innocent LEO and more likely you'll get yourself killed.

You teach self defense? To whom? You need to tell your students that when the police are coming through the door first to cease all movement and then follow directions that are given.

Objection, your honor. Assuming facts not in evidence. :(

Given that I (and you) estimate the probability of me being the object of a no-knock warrant at near zero, should I not assume that a bunch of people running through my house screaming whatever are not there legally or to be kind and gentle.

If I chose to fight then
If it's a legal no-knock warrant, I'm likely dead.
If it's bad guys and I do nothing, I'm likely dead.
If it's bad guys under any circumstances I can envision, my immediately fighting back improves the odds, but does not guarantee my survival.

If there are other simple choices, I've not considered, jump right in. However, as a QP, I'm certain you are aware of the limited ability of a trained human to juggle a lot of issues before making a fight decision. Consider how much less me and my students are prepared to evaluate anything but the simplest fight decision.

Some background that informs my decision is
During the survival seminar for private pilots I recently took, they taught that the most likely cause of death during a survival incident is "The Will to Live, not lack of knowledge."
During the seminar "The Bullet Proof Mind" by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, he related that he was one of the consultants to review the VPI tragedy. Many of the kids that died simply put their head down and waited to be shot. They had lost, or never had a robust will to live.
VPI was the seminal event that caused me to have guns re-enter my life. I was on the rifle team at college, but that didn't count. I recruited for my company years earlier at VPI and had myself been in that building. That focused my mind. My son and his ex-wife got their Masters degrees there. It little effect on them. I decided to start the long journey of educating myself and to provide them knowledge I had failed to provide as a parent. I've actually made some small progress with my ex-daughter-in-law. She now accepts the inoculation principle and will permit me to teach her children about guns. Not to shoot them, but to remove the novelty so that they are more likely not to harm themselves. First steps are often small.

I see others have made my point more simply while I was constructing the above.

[Leozinho]

Six different guys screaming "Police - Search Warrant" sounds like six guys screaming.

So Joe Six Pack is jolted out of a sound sleep by the sound of his front door being kicked in and a number of screaming dark clad individuals running down his hallway.

"Oh, look honey, it's the local police force serving a no-knock warrant."

Yeah, right. I think the practice might be a bit overused.

I don't know how often it's used, but the bar to get a no knock warrant, served at night, is pretty high.

However, whether it's overused or not isn't the question. The question is how to not to get killed if a warrant is served at your house. Reaching for the AR, if the people coming through the door are LEO, isn't the answer.

[Leozinho]

Objection, your honor. Assuming facts not in evidence. :(

Given that I (and you) estimate the probability of me being the object of a no-knock warrant at near zero, should I not assume that a bunch of people running through my house screaming whatever are not there legally or to be kind and gentle.

If I chose to fight then
If it's a legal no-knock warrant, I'm likely dead.
If it's bad guys and I do nothing, I'm likely dead.
If it's bad guys under any circumstances I can envision, my immediately fighting back improves the odds, but does not guarantee my survival.

If there are other simple choices, I've not considered, jump right in. However, as a QP, I'm certain you are aware of the limited ability of a trained human to juggle a lot of issues before making a fight decision. Consider how much less me and my students are prepared to evaluate anything but the simplest fight decision.

I see others have made my point more simply while I was constructing the above.

LEOs serve thousands of warrants every day, and home invasions under the guise of a LE warrant are exceedingly rare. Even though the odds of the police serving a no knock warrant on you are very low, they are higher than the other scenario. Blindly assuming that the people identifying themselves as police entering your home are not there legally will get you get killed many more times over than it will save you.

Again, who are you teaching self defense?

If other's have made your point, I don't see it. Pete? He said no-knock warrants are overused. We aren't discussing whether they are overused, and thatonly adds to the idea that you might have a legitimate warrant served against you anyway. Sierra Bravo? Ryan Frederick was charged with murder, convicted of voluntary manslaughter, sentenced to ten years and was lucky not to have been killed the night of the incident. His case may support Pete's idea that no-knock warrants are overused, but I don't see how that incident supports your position. Had he not fired at the people identifying themselves as police, he'd be free.

[JAGO]

I don't know how often it's used, but the bar to get a no knock warrant, served at night, is pretty high.

However, whether it's overused or not isn't the question. The question is how to not to get killed if a warrant is served at your house. Reaching for the AR, if the people coming through the door are LEO, isn't the answer.

There are two bars for LE to cross. States have different and often tighter rules than the feds. To get a no-Knock the FLEO provides the Magistrate Judge with evidence the subject has a violent history, that there is a likelyhood that evidence may be destroyed. An agent's statement such as, "I have been a FLEO for 6 years and during my career I have served many search warrants and most subjects attemt to (delete the computer files, flush the dope, or whatever) is enough.

Under federal rules warrants are to be served between 0600-2200 unless the MJ gives you a nightcap. However, if the FLEO includes a CSA element under 21 USC (drugs) there is no showing required and the nightcap is authomatic. For Title 18 violations, the agent just shows a need for a nightcap and the M.J. routinely grants it.

I think the issue Howard C is addressing doesn't concern the raid of a criminal's house. It concerns an honest person sleeping in their house. What if the cops make a mistake and upon waking, he engages them?

I fully support the proposition that to knowingly resist the cops is foolish and often fatal. But if the cops make a mistake, and you as the homeowner also make a mistake, the question then becomes can you be held criminally and civily liable? And that is where I entered the discussion.

If you have done nothing wrong, and in your suprise you reach for the gun when the constables blunder by breaking into the wrong house, then why should you be punished?

v/r
phil

[Pete]

...Again, who are you teaching self defense......

And what's you point?

A person doing nothing wrong has his door licked in while he's sleeping and you infer he should just raise his hands and say "Welcome, welcome. Come right in."?

You have pointed out just how low the chances of someone being hit by a bad guy is, lower still for it to be a SWAT team. So by your statement the chances of it being LEO's are very, very low. But you expect the homeowner to make the snap decision and do the right thing?

What are the numbers of innocent homeowners shot and killed by cops doing a forced entry that are acceptable to the powers that be? 1%? 2% 5%? Lets not even get into the numbers of family dogs shot while going this.

Every time LEOs kick in a door there is the chance that an innocent person could be shot. A chance it's the wrong house. A chance the snitch is settling a score. Why does it rest on the citizen to make the correct snap call? He is sleeping while all this started.

Hey, no problem, drop some dope and call it a good shoot. Pat everyone one the back and head for the nearest bar for a few drinks. "Oh, and wife of the dead guy, you need to get somebody to fix this door. Somebody could break in."

Mistakes kill people - only cops can do it and get away with it.

http://reason.com/archives/2008/12/05/death-by-swat

http://www.drugwarrant.com/articles/drug-war-victim/

But I like this one the best

http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

[Leozinho]

If you have done nothing wrong, and in your suprise you reach for the gun when the constables blunder by breaking into the wrong house, then why should you be punished?

v/r
phil

If you were defending your home as a reasonable person would, then you shouldn't be punished. (JAGO can tell us if the courts have found that a reasonable person would shoot at police that have properly identified themselves.) But that's not the issue.

Let's put aside the legalities for a second. Put aside whether cops even need to be serving no-knock warrants, Pete. Put aside whether cops make mistakes and serve warrants on the wrong house. (Though we know they do, and that, Brush Okie, by itself means you can't assume that as a law-abiding person you'd never have a warrant served on your house and therefore anyone that comes through the door is fair game. Shooting a cop that came to the wrong house isn't)

I'm discussing is how to get out of this alive. Shooting a person that identifies himself as a police officer with a warrant will likely get you killed. I don't know how to make this clearer. Cops don't serve warrants by themselves. For prudence sake you need a good reason to believe the people coming through your door aren't who they say they are.

The widow can concern herself with the reasonable person test in the civil courts.

[Pete]

..... Shooting a person that identifies himself as a police officer with a warrant will likely get you killed......The widow can concern herself with the reasonable person test in the civil courts.

Six guys screaming is still six guys screaming.

"Oh, yes, we did everything by the book. We IDed our force as police officers. Too bad about your husband, lady, even though we had the wrong house he had no right to try and defend you."

Leozinho - "...Shooting a person that identifies himself as a police officer with a warrant will likely get you killed...." - it probably took you longer to type that phrase than it would take a SWAT team to bust in a door and head for the hallway to the bedrooms.

In a "mistake" which is better? Cop kills inocent homeowner at the wrong house or homeowner kills cop who busted into the wrong house?

Kinda puts a different spin on "To Protect and Serve".

[HowardCohodas]

I'm discussing is how to get out of this alive. Shooting a person that identifies himself as a police officer with a warrant will likely get you killed. I don't know how to make this clearer. Cops don't serve warrants by themselves. For prudence sake you need a good reason to believe the people coming through your door aren't who they say they are.

You have written earlier, "You teach self defense? To whom? You need to tell your students that when the police are coming through the door first to cease all movement and then follow directions that are given.," and I have not answered. I wanted the Socratic dialog that followed to teach something to us all.

The simple answer is that I teach CCP classes. Most of the students attend to cover the State requirement to get their Ohio permit. These classes have students with a wide variety of experiences, from never having held a firearm to experienced shooters. I am also preparing some modules for advanced students who want additional training, not only in shooting skills but in SA.

Why do I hold the position I have espoused regarding no-knock? I "teach" that one make decisions based only on what one knows with certainty. I introduced the no-knock--good guy scenario to add the element of possible "good guy" attacks to enrich the thinking process of my students.

I maintain that I only know with certainty: I am a good guy. People are in my house yelling. It's the middle of the night. Flight is not an option. I want to live. I want my family to live.

I further maintain that I cannot know things you wish me to consider in my decision making: It's LEOs and not bad guys.

The only question I concern myself with is "what will maximize my probability of living through this." I maintain that waiting for incontrovertible evidence to differentiate good guy vs. bad guy is waiting too long. At that moment of decision, I do not consider what I will tell the prosecutor or the jury.

Among many of my instructor colleges, my position is considered politically incorrect. That's why I named the web site I am creating to contain some of my material Politically Incorrect Self Defense. The domain name is PI-SD.com. (For those of you inclined to spot such things, yes, I intended the "joke" in the name.)

I'm always trying to learn so that I make better decisions myself and I can share that with my students. So far you have not changed my mind, but I'm always in listening mode, so if I've missed something, keep at me. I do not resent that in the least. I do not characterize this as argument in the pejorative sense, but Socratic dialog in the learning sense.

[JAGO]

If you were defending your home as a reasonable person would, then you shouldn't be punished. (JAGO can tell us if the courts have found that a reasonable person would shoot at police that have properly identified themselves.) But that's not the issue.

Let's put aside the legalities for a second. Put aside whether cops even need to be serving no-knock warrants, Pete. Put aside whether cops make mistakes and serve warrants on the wrong house. (Though we know they do, and that, Brush Okie, by itself means you can't assume that as a law-abiding person you'd never have a warrant served on your house and therefore anyone that comes through the door is fair game. Shooting a cop that came to the wrong house isn't)

I'm discussing is how to get out of this alive. Shooting a person that identifies himself as a police officer with a warrant will likely get you killed. I don't know how to make this clearer. Cops don't serve warrants by themselves. For prudence sake you need a good reason to believe the people coming through your door aren't who they say they are.

The widow can concern herself with the reasonable person test in the civil courts.

Leozino,

I agree, it is foolish and often fatal to fail to comply.

When confronted on the street by any person who says "police", submit to the authority. If it is a false arrest, sue 'em. If they have violated your 4th Amend Rights, go to the US Attorney and get them criminally prosecuted for violations of 18 USC 242 (civil rights).

The issue I am talking about - which I think applies to virtually all on PS.com,
you are in your home (your castle) and are doing NOTHING wrong. Some Bozo crashes thru your door during the nighttime. Do you engage.

Of course, if you realize it's the law, lay down with your hands showing and wait to get it all sorted out. You are going to come in to a lot of $$ and if you get a really good lawyer to talk to the USAO, you stand a pretty good chance of getting the cops their 37 month mandatory minimum.

But if you have done nothing wrong, you react as you were trained and you engage, I distinguish fighting anyone in your home, from a person who encouters the law on the street.

Again, I agree 100%, it's foolish to resist people you believe to be LEOs.

v/r
phil

[JAGO]

If you were defending your home as a reasonable person would, then you shouldn't be punished. (JAGO can tell us if the courts have found that a reasonable person would shoot at police that have properly identified themselves.) (snip snip)

I'm discussing is how to get out of this alive. Shooting a person that identifies himself as a police officer with a warrant will likely get you killed. I don't know how to make this clearer. Cops don't serve warrants by themselves. For prudence sake you need a good reason to believe the people coming through your door aren't who they say they are.

The widow can concern herself with the reasonable person test in the civil courts.

I have been wrestling with this all day. It is a classic dilemma. As time permitted between episodes of work, I've been trying without success to find some cases on point to share for discussion.

But Google may help you reach your own conclusion:

Terms 'Homeowner shoots police' gives a whole list of incidents which for the most part affirm the actions of homeowners shooting intruders. But just as I can't locate law, I can't find even a single article on point with the homeowner shooting at the police (however as cited earlier in this the string - the police in AZs have mistakenly shot a homeowner and are being sued).

As Leozino points out, your chances of getting killed are overwhelming.

Google serach of "Right to resist illegal arrest" starts with articles citing our common law right to resist, and reveals how recent laws have restricted that right. Like it or not, the "enlightened" approach appears to be that you yield to the false arrest/search and sue the police afterwards.

We have two competing interests, your right to defend your home from illegal entry (which I argue should be near absolute when the home is occupied, but limited in that you can't use "spring guns" or traps to protect you propery intersts). There are growing legal limitations on the right to resist an illegal arrest.

I suggest that deciding on TTP is up to each of us. Everyone should know the laws of their home state as it pertains to defense of the home and their right of self defense.

I wish I could give a a good clear answer and cite some authority - but I can not. Sorry.

v/r
phil

[The Reaper]

I have been following this thread with interest.

The following points occur to me.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees the rights of American citizens to be free from unreasonable searches.

LEOs, like everyone else, occasionally make mistakes.

Some LEOs may be intentionally setting you up for reasons of their own.

Judges will generally issue warrants requested and documented properly by the LEOs.

Some criminals dress and identify themselves as LEOs on a warrant service to rip-off other people.

A no-knock warrant does not allow for the time to verify IDs or to deconflict a a case of mistaken ID, address, etc.

Some homeowners are armed and some of those may attempt to defend themselves or their families from a violent home invasion.

A non-notice high-risk warrant service is not going to be Barney Fife acting alone. The team is going to be well-armed and likely, well-trained.

The home owner may engage the team first, and cause casualties. I would probably attempt to do so, if woken from a sound sleep by breaking glass and shouting.

I do not think the home owner will survive what comes afterwards. He will not be alive to speak at a legal proceeding. If he does, there will be several dead or wounded LEOs.

This is a lose-lose situation.

How often is service by no-knock warrant justified, how often is it issued, and how often is it wrongfully served?

TR

[HowardCohodas]

I have been following this thread with interest.

The following points occur to me.

<snip>

Good summary. Can't think of anything I would argue with. That is, of course, if I were inclined to do that sort of thing.* ;)

*My homage to a Shelly Berman routine of 40+ years ago.

[Five-O]

How often is service by no-knock warrant justified, how often is it issued, and how often is it wrongfully served?

TR

No knock warrants are justified when exigent circumstances are present. The history of the targeted individuals and if they have a propensity towards violence. Are they known to carry firearms...have they made statements in the past regarding never being taken alive? Is critical evidence likely to be destroyed if a knock and announce warrant is served. What is the likely sentence if convicted..are there multiple subjects at the house? Those are just a few questions that need to be answered. In short no knock warrants are not the norm...fortunately. Many times, I would prefer to arrest the subject when he gets out of his car to get a cup of coffee in the morning at his local 7-11, rather than entering his AO where he likely knows every nook and crany and has an advantage.

[Five-O]

...and as an aside...to my knowledge...IRS dudes have always had access to firearms.

[Utah Bob]

...and as an aside...to my knowledge...IRS dudes have always had access to firearms.

Not all the dudes. Just the LE ones.
Thank goodness.;)

[incarcerated]

Predictable article in the wake of the Austin plane incident?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704757904575077381781219798.html?m od=WSJ_latestheadlines

Threats Against IRS Employees on the Rise, Official Says

U.S. NEWS
FEBRUARY 20, 2010, 12:46 P.M. ET
By MARTIN VAUGHAN
WASHINGTON—The federal agency charged with ensuring the safety of IRS employees said it has seen an uptick in the past several years in threats against agency personnel.

In the past four years, there appears to have been a "steady, upward trend" in the number of threats against IRS employees, said an official with the Treasury Department's Inspector General for Tax Administration. That assessment, offered in response to an inquiry from Dow Jones Newswires, is based on preliminary data, the official cautioned

On Thursday, 53-year old Andrew Joseph Stack crashed his private plane into an Austin, Texas, office building that housed IRS workers, killing himself and one IRS employee and injuring 13 others.

Following the attack, Inspector General J. Russell George said his agency will consider whether changes to security policies are necessary to improve safety....

In recent years, TIGTA has investigated roughly 900 threats made against IRS employees annually. In 2009, that number climbed above 1,000.

There is a history of violence directed at IRS employees, and IRS facilities in Austin have been targeted in the past. In June 2008, a separate Austin IRS building received a letter including white powder and a phony anthrax threat. John Barker of Kansas was convicted of mailing the threatening letter and sentenced to one year in prison.

Charles Ray Polk was apprehended in 1995 after trying to purchase a machine gun from an undercover police officer, and sentenced to 75 years in prison for plotting to blow up an Austin IRS building.

TIGTA isn't your run-of-the mill federal inspector general. IGs are usually charged with policing waste and abuse, and helping agencies operate more successfully and efficiently.

But in addition to those duties, Treasury's IG also has a staff of nearly 400 agents, some armed, who investigate crimes including bribery, unauthorized access to confidential information, and threats and assaults against IRS personnel.

Just two years ago, congress gave TIGTA the authority to send armed escorts to accompany IRS officials paying visits to taxpayers deemed "potentially dangerous."

According to Mr. George, TIGTA is unique among law-enforcement authorities because it has access to confidential taxpayer information. That helps the agency coordinate with the Federal Bureau of Investigations in investigating crimes that appear connected to tax grievances....

[SF-TX]

Everyone else in the US government has guns why not the IRS?;)

This is probably a good time for the Dept of Education, Department of Commerce, Department of Human Services, Department of Labor and the CDC "Enforcement Divisions" to "kit-up" and get some good purchases on weapons and equipment.:rolleyes:

Apparently, others agree with your suggestion. ;)

Remington Shotguns
Solicitation Number: EDOOIG-10-000004
Agency: Department of Education
Office: Contracts & Acquisitions Management
Location: Contracts (All ED Components)

Synopsis:
Added: Mar 08, 2010 10:39 am Modified: Mar 11, 2010 10:16 amTrack Changes

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.
The required date of delivery is March 22, 2010.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?id=16f1571b63e3d75d15583cc75b21d58c

[koz]

Man - they're getting really tough on those who don't complete their homework...:eek:

SF-TX - you must read Drudge too.

[Paslode]

Apparently, others agree with your suggestion. ;)

What would the Department of Education need with shotguns?

[The Reaper]

What would the Department of Education need with shotguns?

The RFP says that they are going to the Dept. of Education Inspector General.

Must be for investigating fraud, waste, and abuse by some bad people.:rolleyes:

TR

[Richard]

Maybe Arnie's got some old pals from Chicago who want to 'educate' him...

Richard

[Paslode]

The RFP says that they are going to the Dept. of Education Inspector General.

Must be for investigating fraud, waste, and abuse by some bad people.:rolleyes:

TR


I thought that is what we had the FBI for...interesting.

[craigepo]

"FREEZE"

"Drop the crayons, you little bastard."

"You, with the Big Chief tablet, nose in the dirt."

"HOLY SHIT, HE'S GONNA THROW A KICKBALL!!"

(pow)

"Great shot. You hit that kickball in mid-air"

"Whew, lucky we had these shotguns."

"Man, I'm hungry. Let's get to Golden Corral, before they shut down the buffet."

"Yeah. We need to keep our energy up. Tomorrow we've gotta take down a sorority house."

[Ret10Echo]

What would the Department of Education need with shotguns?

Actually that would be "MORE" shotguns:

From the RFP:

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.

[Team Sergeant]

Actually that would be "MORE" shotguns:

From the RFP:

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.


I was not aware any other federal agency was teaching "combat training" outside of the US military? Please tell me why no one in the news media is asking for an interview concerning the purchase of these weapons by the ED? (I think we should send in a FOIA requesting the purpose of the shotguns by the US Dept of ED!)

We've got some really really stupid leadership in this country, out right morons. As I said before a 14 inch barrel shotgun has but one purpose and it ain't "DEFENSE" and it ain't for "discriminating" style of shooting either. All it's going to take is one wrong person getting hit by the blast of one and in turn they will sue and win any court battle just because of the offensive & stupid style of weapon chosen.

[Ret10Echo]

Post and other MSM outlets are sniffing at this but appears to be focused on the current purchase, not the organizational structure and "LE" requirements.


Education Department buying 27 shotguns
Why is the Education Department purchasing 27 Remington Brand Model 870 police 12-gauge shotguns (all new, no re-manufactured products, thank you)?

The guns are to replace old firearms used by Education’s Office of Inspector General, which is the law enforcement arm of the department.

Here’s a statement from the office in response to a question about why need 27 shotguns with a 14-inch barrels:

“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 their Web site at : www.ed.gov/oig "

You can find, here (http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/ireports.html), a list of reports on fraud cases the office has worked on for the last decade.

I asked department officials for specific examples of when the rifles might be used, but was referred to the above statement. Perhaps agents need some muscle while apprehending folks charged with fraud.

Here's a link (http://www.ignet.gov/pande/standards/agleguidelines.pdf)to an 11-page document from the Department of Justice with guidelines for the Offices of Inspector Generals within federal government department that have been given law enforcement authority. It provides detail about firearm training is to be carried out and under what circumstances authorized personnel can engage in law enforcement activities.

[Pete]

Man, it takes a whole lot of shooting or misuse to wear out a shotgun.

Funny that the Dept Of Education would have an ammo budget but force kids out of class for drawing a picture of a gun.