I’m going to tread very carefully around this one:
An agent with the IRS is dead after being accidentally shot by another agent during a training exercise Thursday at a federal gun range, according to officials.
Arizona’s Family reports a spokesperson for the Federal Bureau of Prisons confirmed that an incident occurred at its gun range in the Phoenix area. The gun range was reportedly being utilized by multiple federal agencies at the time of the shooting through an interagency agreement.
Here are my thoughts on this rather touchy topic.
If this kind of training tragedy befalls actual federal law enforcement agencies (FBI, DEA, Secret Service, etc.) then I am truly sorry, and mourn their loss.
But far as all the other federal alphabet agencies (IRS, DoE — Education or Energy — BLM, etc.) are concerned: I don’t care. They shouldn’t be armed in the first place, and therefore have no business being around a federal firearms training facility.
My reason for saying this is quite simple: what the federal government has been doing for the past seventy-odd years is turning misdemeanors or regulatory infractions into federal crimes, and ordinary citizens into criminals every chance they get. But for all that, the latter agencies are not law enforcement departments, as much as the government would like them to be such.
Let me get specific.
It is a totally abhorrent idea that the IRS — who are nothing more than a bunch of accountants and debt collectors — should be sending their agents to get firearms training (on the use of, lest we forget, full-automatic firearms). Who are they going to use those guns on? And don’t insult me with the “self-defense” argument: we ordinary folk aren’t allowed to use automatic rifles and machine guns to protect ourselves; why should these jumped-up bureaucrats get special treatment? Let’s be honest: when an IRS agent is issued with an actual assault rifle — that would be a full-auto rifle, not some semi-auto AR-15 — it’s not to protect himself or his home from rampaging tax delinquents, it’s most likely because he’ll be ordered to storm someone else’s home or place of employment (that would be the very definition of “assault”). And by the way, that’s the job of the FBI, not the bean-counters.
So no: as much as I feel the suffering and loss of this agent’s life for his family, the plain fact of the matter was that he had no damn business being there in the first place.
And the fact that he was there is entirely the responsibility of the federal government.
By the way, should any of the alphabet agencies read this, you should know that my opinion in this is probably the mildest you’ll encounter among the vast majority of the population. Out there, if you listen carefully, you’ll hear the popping of champagne corks. The federal government offers little comfort to the population of this country; they should expect little in return.
Update: both in Comments and by email, Readers take issue with my stance on the Dept. of Energy not needing guns, in that they have to guard installations like nukes and other such power plants.
No.
If those installations are so important to the national security (and they are), they need to be guarded by the military and not by the paramilitary. The point is that the military is Constitutionally restricted in terms of its deployment (against citizens), whereas a paramilitary force isn’t. I’d rather that power be held by the Army (and therefore by Congress) than by a bunch of bureaucrats.
As a side hustle, the Department of Energy manages US nuclear weapon facilities. They have a force of Security Police Officers (SPOs) who provide security for the weapons, and the facilities where they are built, stored, maintained etc.
The SPOs are a little misnamed, as they are actually a well equipped and trained light infantry force equipped with armoured vehicles, Mark 19 automatic grenade launchers, belt fed machine guns etc, so not really police as most people understand the term.
My point being that yes, the IRS, shouldn’t be fucking around with guns, but the DoE actually have a valid reason for having an armed branch.
I’ll add that one of the softest spoken and most dangerous men I’ve ever met was a SPO, and I’ve known a lot of dangerous men. Ex Marine and ex police SWAT commander. Most of the SPOs were like that. Seriously capable gunslingers too. You really wouldn’t want to fuck with any of them.
+1 I was going to make the same point.
uh no, they used to. The nuclear weapons were reassigned to the armed forces decades ago.
And all that time the guarding of those facilities was already relegated to the military, especially the US Marine Corps.
About the only department that’d have a legitimate reason to have weapons training would be the treasury, as one of their sub departments is the US Secret Service, tasked with protecting (among others, but primarily) the president and former presidents.
Secret Service used to be in Treasury because of their role in dealing with counterfeiting (original mission); but they are now a part of DHS.
Uh, yes. The military is responsible for deployment. The DoE is responsible for manufacturing, maintenance, disposal etc.
Here is one of their major facilities, run by the DoE, and protected by a very large DoE SPO force.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantex
And further about SPOs
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Protective_Forces#:~:text=The%20Federal%20Protective%20Forces%20(also,Category%20I%20special%20nuclear%20material.
The Civil Engineering firm I worked for in the mid seventies did the design for the upgraded Perimeter Security fence surrounding the Rocky Flats (Nuclear) Weapons Plant. 16 ft chain link double Fence with an access road in between. 90 second response time to any point on the perimeter. Motion detectors. microphones and stuff we weren’t supposed to ask about but had to make provisions for. They did not want anybody to cross that fence line. and they kept a very close watch on the protestors camped out along the highway 5 miles back on the unmarked access road. Even with all the right credentials I was always thoroughly searched and checked entering AND leaving by scary looking serious guards. ( and they always kept the dosimeter they gave me on entering. ) I never saw weapons on the guards but I’m sure they had them nearby.
Professor John Lott wrote in, “More Guns, Less Crime”, you are more than 8 times as likely to be shot by a gov’t employee than another citizen.
“…as much as I feel the suffering and loss of this agent’s life…”
=========
I didn’t know the motherfucker and I’m glad it will no longer pose as a threat to others.
“And the fact that he was there is entirely the responsibility of the federal government.”
=========
No.
HE/SHE made a choice to participate in that criminal enterprise and deserves all that goes with it.
I think this has been said in the past, but I’m of the opinion that there should only be one fed-govt agency that is armed and allowed to arrest US citizens. And, drawing number out of hat, that should be the US Marshals service. All other agencies, during the course of their investigations, when they reach a point where they can obtain a valid arrest warrant, should then turn that warrant over to the Marshals Service and allow them to serve it, as needed. The Marshals, for their part, should then double check the validity of the investigation and the warrant prior to serving it. This will hopefully help avoid needless political prosecutions. Not perfect, but better than nothing.
And that opinion includes the FBI. Disarm all other agencies completely. Including FBI. They can still do all the investigating, the special labs, etc., but any and all armed actions should either be Marshals or local law enforcement. Period.
Finally, to the DOE comment above, those SPO’s can be made a small branch of the armed services as necessary.
+1
US Marshal Service should be the only agency that serves subpoenas and warrants for the feds, thus be armed.
But, but, but what about the Air Marshals? Nope! Passengers seem to do a better job of beating down the problem makers if you just get out of their way.
I lost no sleep over this range accident
I’ve been a tax lawyer for 40 years, and these mutts don’t need to augment the Praetorian guard that other bureaucracies have become
Well, if they are like any other large operation, they are dipping into the shallow end of the of the competency pond, and throw in vibrancy and you get what you get.
I’m with you, BTW – we don’t need to armor up gubermint agencies just because. Worst I heard was the Department of Education swat team going after a wretch who didn’t pay up.
My take is a little different.
Every citizen of the United States has a basic right to keep and bear arms. The employees of the FBI, DEA, ATF, IRS, Secret Service, etc have the same right and to the same degree. They should be able to carry whatever weapon in whatever manner is allowed to the unbadged citizens in whatever jurisdiction they are operating in.
The power to enforce warrants — especially if it involves equipment not allowed to the unbadged — should be restricted, as much as possible, to an agency not involved in the investigation. Don Curton’s example above could be a good start. If Mr. Three-Letter-Agency agent wants to be in on the bust, he can be there but he is not in charge of the operation and only gets to carry whatever the local laws allow an unbadged citizen.
As to the IRS agent that died, I find it hard to feel much pity. He chose to work for an agency that is integrated into the ever growing federal praetorian state — You pays your money and you takes your choice. I do feel sympathy for his wife and children — should he have either — but not so much for the man himself.
true, but that doesn’t mean their employer should arm them and supply them with training facilities.
If they are allowed to be armed on duty (right now most government employees except the alphabet agency enforcers aren’t, even the army isn’t allowed to be armed except in battle or on firing ranges) that should go for ALL government employees, and they should ALL be allowed to carry the same weapons as every other citizen, so no fully automatic weapons, no explosives, etc. etc.
The individual loss of life here is tragic. This was someone’s child, sibling, parent, spouse, friend, etc. Their community will mourn this loss and it is no time to gloat.
We are seeing private citizens and businesses being strongly discouraged from any kind of physical altercation when theft of property is in question. The logic goes that no amount of money and/or property is worth a person’s life. Okay. However, if that is the reasoning, then no amount of tax delinquency is worth a person’s life and as such the IRS forfeits its rationale for arming their agents. They shouldn’t be pursuing a violent confrontation to apprehend someone who is in arrears to the IRS.
“The logic goes that no amount of money and/or property is worth a person’s life.”
======
And then reality sticks it nasty head under the tent.
Anyone attempting to steal something that belongs to someone else is doing so while using force, whether it be with an angry voice, fists, club, or gun. It is the force that needs to be reckoned with. If a thief decides to trade his life for something I own why should I be required to argue with him instead of just sending him to his maker?
Anyway, I was born alone and will die alone and while enjoying the only life I will ever own no one gets to dictate and aspect of it, period. Seriously, if more people spent their time running their own lives they’d have no time left for trying to run other people’s lives.
Me? I have no interest in running anyone else’s life as running my own is a full time job.
Channeling Wayne from Letterkenny, “I could watch these fuckers shoot each other all day long.”
Hard for me to be sad. I’ve watched BLM & USFS a-holes start strutting around with armed staff. They can carry as citizens, not as .gov representatives.
I agree. I am sure the Founding Fathers, had they thought things could get this far using the documents they thought would be sufficient to prevent this would say, the employees can carry, but only what non-government citizens can carry. No auto, no silencers, no explosives. Only in the circumstances citizens can carry. Not in courthouses, bars, near schools, you know the drill.
isn’t the charge of manslaughter created for situations like this? There are many government agencies that have no business being armed. The Internal Revenue Service, Department of Education and many others fall into this category.
The IRS can use FBI or the Marshall service to serve federal warrant. No idea why anyone in the Department of Education is armed.
As far as security for the Department of Energy facilities go, I’m sure there are other agencies who could cover this need within their limits.
JQ