The close of the current Fiscal Year comes at the end of September. Could be that un-obligated funds are being expended for ammunition that could be transferred to Homeland Security, the IRS, FBI or the armed forces after 1 October.
The alterbative to SSA and others having a few armed people (work it out, looks like about four per State) is to have field workers submit requests to other Fed/State/Local agencies for armed support. And if I were sent out to investigate, or serve a warrant for something like SS fraud, I might well want armed backup or at least a firearm (and training). Response to such requests would probably be somewhat less than prompt, and a strain on smaller agencies such as local police.
Yes, even the Post Office (USPS) has armed investigators.
The first artivle I saw on this also mentioned Weather Bureau, I hace since heartd this was an error it was one of the Wildlife (or fisheries?) agencies.
“Even” the post office? The Inspection Service is older than the revenue cutters FFS, and half the size it was a decade ago. Let’s try to keep our tinfoil on straight, shall we? We sure have a lot of different IG departments, all of a sudden. What up with that?
If this issue does no more than publicize the plight of commercial fishermen, we win. Somebody’s pet agency needs the gaff-hook, judiciously and expeditiously applied. The same fish are being taken by the Canadians and Portuguese. Think it matters, to the fish?
The alterbative to SSA and others having a few armed people (work it out, looks like about four per State) is to have field workers submit requests to other Fed/State/Local agencies for armed support.
Or, maybe, if they have reason to suspect that a crime has been committed, they can contact the FBI, and let them do the investigating.
Just like Joe Shopowner would be expected to call the local PoPo if he suspected that Employee Sumdood was skimming cash from the register, the Social Insecurity Administration or Dept. of Mis-Education should call in their local police (i.e., the FBI) rather than investigating on their own.
John A: No error, quite. It was NOAA, and they, for historical/political reasons, do fishery enforcement, and on the high seas. Should they, in an ideal world? Probably not. But they do, now.
Same top-level organization as the NWS, but different branch of the org chart.
I want the guys boarding trespassing trawlers to have sidearms, myself, no matter whose org chart they’re on.
Jake: Problem is, the FBI has no expertise with every part of the Federal law. Whereas, say, SSA investigators can know the relevant parts of the law that tehy actually have to enforce, backwards and forwards.
Be better if there was less – and less stupid – law to require such enforcement, but with things as they stand, I really think that specialists are going to do better at it. And I’d rather have competence spread out than incompetence specialized.
(The FBI isn’t especially incompetent now, doing their various jobs that they sub-specialize in. Make them responsible for every bit of Federal Law Enforcement and they’d either become a giant mess full of the same specialized shops, or become incompetent.)