Page 1 of 4
IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:27 am
by TxD
More scary: They are getting AR 15's.
"Agents actually fired their guns accidently more often than they intentionally fired them in the field, according to an audit by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs ... e-injuries" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:26 am
by VMI77
TxD wrote:More scary: They are getting AR 15's.
"Agents actually fired their guns accidently more often than they intentionally fired them in the field, according to an audit by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs ... e-injuries" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sounds like negligent discharge to me, which it would seem should be grounds for dismissal, or being disarmed.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:41 am
by mjoplin
The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 2:14 pm
by 2firfun50
mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
My question is when will they have SWAT teams and armored vehicles? The IRS is dangerous enough with pencils. OBTW, they are law enforcement agents, just ask them.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 2:23 pm
by gthaustex
2firfun50 wrote:mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
My question is when will they have SWAT teams and armored vehicles? The IRS is dangerous enough with pencils. OBTW, they are law enforcement agents, just ask them.
I'm sure the order for those is in the works...just wait for it...
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:49 pm
by AlaskanInTexas
mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
It's because the IRS
IS a law enforcement agency. They effectuate arrests for tax crimes.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 2:54 am
by Dave2
AlaskanInTexas wrote:mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
It's because the IRS
IS a law enforcement agency. They effectuate arrests for tax crimes.
K. Why not have the local PD handle the arrests? Seems simpler.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:19 am
by Grillmark55
My outrage is that agents who "accidentally" discharge their weapons are not required to have special training. They should be suspended, receive special training AND be required to jockey a desk for six months. Oh wait - they are Government employees; never mind. Common sense rules don't apply.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:14 am
by EEllis
Dave2 wrote:AlaskanInTexas wrote:mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
It's because the IRS
IS a law enforcement agency. They effectuate arrests for tax crimes.
K. Why not have the local PD handle the arrests? Seems simpler.
Wait a min. You think a local PD should pick up the cost and carry the risk and liability of serving fed tax warrants?
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:55 am
by anygunanywhere
VMI77 wrote:TxD wrote:More scary: They are getting AR 15's.
"Agents actually fired their guns accidently more often than they intentionally fired them in the field, according to an audit by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs ... e-injuries" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sounds like negligent discharge to me, which it would seem should be grounds for dismissal, or being disarmed.
Nah. Promote them.
Anygunanywhere
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:28 pm
by Dave2
EEllis wrote:Dave2 wrote:AlaskanInTexas wrote:mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
It's because the IRS
IS a law enforcement agency. They effectuate arrests for tax crimes.
K. Why not have the local PD handle the arrests? Seems simpler.
Wait a min. You think a local PD should pick up the cost and carry the risk and liability of serving fed tax warrants?
Fine, FBI then, or make the arrested person foot the bill if they're found guilty. My point is that I don't want pencil-pushers to have arrest powers because the I don't want to pay for their expensive training when there are already numerous agencies that could do it for them.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 2:43 pm
by mojo84
Dave2 wrote:EEllis wrote:Dave2 wrote:AlaskanInTexas wrote:mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
It's because the IRS
IS a law enforcement agency. They effectuate arrests for tax crimes.
K. Why not have the local PD handle the arrests? Seems simpler.
Wait a min. You think a local PD should pick up the cost and carry the risk and liability of serving fed tax warrants?
Fine, FBI then, or make the arrested person foot the bill if they're found guilty. My point is that I don't want pencil-pushers to have arrest powers because the I don't want to pay for their expensive training when there are already numerous agencies that could do it for them.
Most people would be very surprised to learn how many government agencies have people toting guns and have arrest authority. Social Security Administration is one of many.
Seems like everyone wants to carry a gun and badge.
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 2:56 pm
by talltex
EEllis wrote:Dave2 wrote:K. Why not have the local PD handle the arrests? Seems simpler.
Wait a min. You think a local PD should pick up the cost and carry the risk and liability of serving fed tax warrants?
What extra cost and liability? They are already out there serving warrants for expired vehicle registration in Leander anyway...and you've already stated, NUMEROUS times, they HAVE no liability as long as they are not legally trespassing, are performing their authorized duties and following departmental policy. Why not give'em a chance to hone their skills?
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 3:43 pm
by cb1000rider
mjoplin wrote:The bigger question for me is WHY does a tax collector need a gun???? I understand search warrants, but there are law enforcement agencies equipped to handle that task.
Why do you need a gun?
Lots of people hate 'em.. :-)
Re: IRS Agents ‘Accidentally’ Discharged Guns 11 Times
Posted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:37 pm
by EEllis
talltex wrote:EEllis wrote:Dave2 wrote:K. Why not have the local PD handle the arrests? Seems simpler.
Wait a min. You think a local PD should pick up the cost and carry the risk and liability of serving fed tax warrants?
What extra cost and liability? They are already out there serving warrants for expired vehicle registration in Leander anyway...and you've already stated, NUMEROUS times, they HAVE no liability as long as they are not legally trespassing, are performing their authorized duties and following departmental policy. Why not give'em a chance to hone their skills?
Never stated that