Perhaps there’s a perfectly good explanation for IRS agents being trained in the use of AR-15 rifles, but with so much talk recently about the agency targeting conservatives for their beliefs, the report from Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) is more than a little disconcerting. We’re hoping the answers come sooner than later, but the most transparent administration ever has quite a backlog of questions in the queue.

Earlier this year, Sen. Tom Coburn finally received answers to his questions about the Department of Homeland Security’s ammunition purchases. Sequestration cuts limited the DHS to 100 million rounds in 2013, mostly for training purposes. But the IRS?

Whether it’s unmanned drones or AR-15s, the growing unease among the public has less to do with the technology at work than a distrust in the people calling the shots — not to mention Vice President Biden’s belief that no citizen needs more than a shotgun.

  • Squirrel!

    Telling.

  • Jeremy

    This is very creepy.

    • Bathing Suit Area

      Creepy how? Are you afraid of guns or something? Don’t more people get killed by cars and hammers and stuff?

      • CR

        The creep factor here is the government providing coordinated weapons trainings to IRS agents who apparently tend to “go rogue” in coordinated efforts to target conservative groups. The “low level employees in Cincinnati” shouldn’t be assembled into a mini-military task force for their next effort to come after their political enemies.

        • Bathing Suit Area

          So you’d punish all gov’t agencies for the misdeeds of a few?

          • Rachel

            Too many govt workers. Waste of money and leads to fascism. I’d get rid of most of them.

          • http://politicallyincorrectcanadian.blogspot.ca/ Reverend Ken

            I’d get rid of all of them.

            Fixed that for you.

          • JohnFLob

            You have to be at least very apprehensive of all government agencies even if only a few agencies go rogue such as DHS, EPA, HSS, IRS, NSA, and White House staff. It gets worse when you consider there may be rogue agents within those same organizations.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            Stopping them from having guns won’t help. If an agency wants to kill you they can do it just as easily with a knife or a bomb or a car, and you can’t stop people getting all of those things.

          • JohnFLob

            Would you return a box of nails to the hardware store because half of them have the heads on the wrong end?

          • Bathing Suit Area

            No, silly. I keep them for nailing things to the other side of the house.

          • alanstorm

            So you would make it easier for any given agency to harm the public. Got it.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            Haven’t you read any of the gun control threads? Guns don’t make it easier to kill people, they only make it easier to defend yourself. If this agency wants to kill someone, they can do it just as easily with knives or bombs or cars, or do you want to ban govt agencies having cars now too?

          • alanstorm

            Apparently you do not understand what you read. Shocking, yet your every post here states, quite strongly, that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

            Now pay attention – if you can. Guns do indeed make it easier to kill or injure someone. The flip side is that it also makes it easier to defend yourself. That second point is why the second amendment exists. That amendment, BTW, is applicable to individuals.

            Nice change-of-subject there, by the way, trying to distort the truth that guns do not kill people into guns don’t make it easier to kill or injure. The two phases are not synonymous. (Go look that up if you need to.) As I stated, guns do make it easier to kill or injure someone – which is why they need to be treated with respect, and why civilian government ownership of weapons needs to be carefully scrutinized.

            The Constitution was written to restrict the powers of government, not individuals. That restraint governs those acting as government agents. Obviously, you think that all governments can be trusted with any amount of power, but anyone who’s read any history does not.

          • Guest

            BSA is full of strawmen.

          • alanstorm

            Not really strawmen, just a massive inability to read and understand. Much like someone with advanced Alzheimer’s.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “BSA is full of strawmen.”

            The BS is flowing from his A.

          • http://www.irregulars.us/ towerclimber37

            the state CAN do that, however, because they tend to do so with 20 people instead of 1 or 2 attackers and with the idea that they’re morally right, this makes them far more dangerous and the news that they’re training with these firearms far more ominous.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Guns don’t make it easier to kill people, they only make it easier to defend yourself.”

            And it’s still true. Just as we don’t advocate searching out enemies and criminals to arm at taxpayer expense, neither do we want to empower federal agencies to expand beyond their legitimate scope and make it that much easier to become an enemy of the people through gradual increasing tyranny. It’s not about the guns per se, it’s about who has a right to own and use them. Federal agencies have zero natural rights. They are entitled only to obey the mandates given to them by us, the citizens that do have rights guaranteed by the US constitution.

            Those agents have the same rights we do. But this has nothing to do with limits placed on them when acting on OUR behalf collectively.

            I hope you’re just being sarcastic. It makes me sad to read just how absurd the arguments are that people present just to please their like-minded political peers.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Stopping them from having guns won’t help. If an agency wants to kill you they can do it just as easily with a knife or a bomb or a car, and you can’t stop people getting all of those things.”

            Your arguments are only effective in showing that you don’t understand salience. We don’t want our taxes to pay for armed federal organizations to take over our lives. It’s not about the weapons per se. It’s about an arms race between (somewhat) free people and federal tyranny. We want the free people to win. You can’t distinguish any difference.

            Sadly, you’re not the only leftist that fails in this way. We don’t want any federal agency to grow beyond it’s legitimate scope. Organizations don’t have natural rights. Citizens do.

            Otherwise carry on and show how illogical gun grabber’s arguments are. It’s sad, but funny too.

          • CR

            If I had my way, most fed agencies would be abolished because they are all guilty of overreach and waste. The federal government was granted limited power by the constitution and all other rights were supposed to be reserved to the states. The fed started playing around with the commerce clause, though, and expanding federal power to the point where we are now in this situation where we have a massive, corrupt and untrustworthy bureaucracy that has far, far, far too much power.

          • alanstorm

            Please describe how restricting the ability of a government agency = “punishment”.

          • Saint_Zero

            Yup. Maybe the rest will fall back in line and not threaten American citizens.

          • Marvin Nelson

            IRS agents do not need AR 15s, numbnuts.

          • http://politicallyincorrectcanadian.blogspot.ca/ Reverend Ken

            IRS agents need cell time then unemployment for life.

          • Marcy Cook

            Well isn’t that what the IRS did to the Tea Party? And they didn’t do anything wrong. What’s good for the goose is good now for the gander.

          • http://www.FunDMental.com TheRealJackpineSavage

            Given the context, this has to be the Dumbest thing I have real all day.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “So you’d punish all gov’t agencies for the misdeeds of a few?”

            Leftist moron.

          • Anubis

            “existing” is a misdeed for most US governmental agencies, if you want to be completely technical about it.

          • HisCrownJewel

            Punish? No, of course not. Over-site and regulation, absolutely. No agency should be an island.

        • HisCrownJewel

          And training and arming NOAA as well, for what do they need stand off capability?

      • Rachel

        He’s not creeped out by the guns…but who is wielding them. The IRS.

        • Bathing Suit Area

          So you want what, some sort of background check for which gov’t agencies are allowed to buy guns? The NRA would call you a Nazi for that.

          • Rachel

            We want to know WHY the IRS who is in charge of collecting taxes, needs AR-15’s. Especially in light of the scandal they are involved in for illegally targeting American citizens who have commited no crimes. Political targetting. It’s unAmerican and unConstitutional. If they need guns in their private life, no problem. But why do their jobs require AR15’S? Exactly how many law enforcement agencies does a country NEED? How many Obama armies are required? You want to live in a police state, idiot?

          • Bathing Suit Area

            Why do you NEED to limit their rights to have weapons to protect themselves?

          • CR

            My gosh you are obtuse. You do not see the difference between a citizen and an agent of the government acting in official capacity?!?!

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            No, he can’t see beyond Obama’s mirkin.

          • Jeremy

            You don’t get it and there is no point in trying it’s useless.

          • V the K

            Trying to reason with trolls is like trying to explain differential calculus to a box turtle.

          • alanstorm

            We need to limit their ability to harm us. As members of a gov’t agency, the question of rights in their case does not arise.

            You really are quite slow.

          • wwbdinct

            Good. Then don’t try to limit the public’s rights to have the same weapon to protect themselves from the jack-booted thugs of the IRS. BTW – the IRS agents need to protect themselves from what? Has there been an epidemic of citizens shooting IRS agents?

          • Bathing Suit Area

            Has there been an epidemic of the IRS shooting citizens? Guess there’s nothing to worry about then.

          • alanstorm

            Ah – so you want to wait for such as occasion? You first.

          • http://www.irregulars.us/ towerclimber37

            actually there HAS. also an epidemic of them invading homes- One man, they caught in the shower naked and waved pistols in his face. he had a heart attack and died.

          • wwbdinct

            No. But is there an epidemic of crime of citizen on citizen? Yes. Therefore it’s imperative that citizens are able to defend themselves from the criminal element that inhabit our country. So if the IRS can have AR-15’s (for whatever reason, I have no idea) then the citizens have a right to own them too. See? Simple.

          • HisCrownJewel

            Umm, maybe not yet, of the type you’re referring to, but as we’re trying to point out here, THEY’RE GETTING READY!!! Why on earth do you think the agents are being armed and trained? Duck hunting?

          • Cyrena

            BAM

          • http://politicallyincorrectcanadian.blogspot.ca/ Reverend Ken

            not yet.

          • JohnFLob

            We NEED to limit their rights to carry weapons because they are trained to have an aggressive, threatening, take no prisoners, type attitude. The only difference between IRS agents and Navy Seals is their uniforms.

          • Jay Stevens

            Two differences:
            Seals are better trained.
            I would trust a SEAL before I would trust an IRS agent.

          • JohnFLob

            Mentally you seems to have wondered out of the bating suit area. Your nonsense is nude and fully exposed.

          • Aaron Poche

            Are you being deliberately obtuse?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Why do you NEED to limit their rights to have weapons to protect themselves?”

            They have the same rights as any other citizen, and when acting as agents of the government, they’re “rights” are further limited by the scope of the mandate of the role they serve.

            A surgeon can own a gun for personal use, but probably will not be allowed to take it in to a surgical theater while operating on a live human. Most people are further limited by their employers. Government employees are limited by their employers, that’s us.

          • CR

            Nope. I want the government agencies to have very limited power as granted to them by the constitution. Show me where in the constitution it says that the IRS has the right to bear arms and I’ll be completely fine with the IRS training with AR-15s.

          • alanstorm

            So you are unaware of the difference between a citizen and a government agency?

            Citizens do not have to demonstrate a need. Gov’t agencies should have to do just that.

          • http://www.irregulars.us/ towerclimber37

            your attempt at snark is failing miserably. Since the govt. is the one that does the background checks, your post only shows your ignorance and hoplophobia.

          • HisCrownJewel

            for those who didn’t know (like me) but were too lazy to look it up…

            hoplophobia

            n. Irrational, morbid fear of guns (coined by Col. Jeff
            Cooper, from the Greek “hoplites,” weapon). May cause sweating, faintness,
            discomfort, rapid pulse, nausea, sleeplessness, more, at mere thought of guns.
            Hoplophobes are common and should never be involved in setting gun policies.
            Point out hoplophobic behavior when noticed, it is dangerous, sufferers deserve
            pity, and should seek treatment. When confronted, hoplophobes typically go into
            denial, a common characteristic of the affliction. Often helped by training, or
            by coaching at a range, a process known to psychiatry as “desensitization,”
            often useful in treating many phobias. Also: Hoplophobe, hoplophobic.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “So you want what, some sort of background check for which gov’t agencies are allowed to buy guns?”

            I want background checks for all employees of our government.

            On their own time they have all the rights of any other citizen. Still confused?

            “The NRA would call you a Nazi for that.”

            You probably are still confused.

        • Jeremy

          Yeah the IRS should not be armed that is ridiculous.

      • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

        Wait until they find a discrepancy in your health care and come to your door with them.

      • Garth Haycock

        No swing and miss here. You got caught looking.

  • Clayton Grant
    • Squirrel!

      So according to the Fox article it’s made to sound like this has something to do with enforcing the new healthcare law. They must be expecting a lot of angry tax payers. If you don’t need healthcare before they show up, you will afterward. That or a mortician. IRS agents with guns. Yipes!!

      • Clayton Grant

        The IRS has had armed agents for most of its existence, but like Rep. Jeff Duncan asked; “Why do they need stand-off capability?”

        • Squirrel!

          Right. Saw that. Must be part of the plan they have for us peons.

          • ian143

            Push the people enough and we will push back and there’s more of us than them

        • Bathing Suit Area

          Responsible gun owners should have training on how to use their weapons, what’s the big deal?

          • JohnFLob

            If those weapons are government property and only used by the IRS agents then those agents are not the “gun owners”.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            The agency is the gun owner, same principle applies.

          • CR

            Nope. Paid for by tax dollars. The agency works for us. Just as an individual employer saying he does not want his employees to use company money to buy guns or does not want his employees to train in how to use guns on the job is not the same thing as the government trying to take guns.

            We the people do not want IRS agents to use our tax dollars to buy government weapons and to train on our dime to shoot those weapons.

          • JohnFLob

            Then the agency should get the training not the agents.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The agency is the gun owner, same principle applies.”

            We own the agency.

        • Bathing Suit Area

          It’s not up to them to prove why they need to exercise their rights to defend themselves.

          • Rachel

            defend themselves against WHOM? the people they have been illegally targetting? Conservatives, Christians, Patriots and Tea Party? Haven’t you been paying attention to the news. If that is OK with you, then I assume it will be OK when the Conservatives are in power and they go after you, right?

          • Bathing Suit Area

            Are you suggesting limiting access to weapons because despite talk about them being for self defense, they might be more likely used to attack or intimidate others? That is the sort of crazy stuff that Hitler did.

          • Rachel

            You are either being obtuse, or you just aren’t very smart. Since you’re a lefty, my guess is the latter.

          • HisCrownJewel

            Aren’t they the same thing? Or is this person just trying to raise ire? Can anybody be this dense?

          • CR

            Again, this is the people trying to limit the power of our government. Very different from a government trying to take power from the people that has been guaranteed to them. The government has gone out of control, they are taking power that we the people did not give to them.

          • alanstorm

            You seem to be starting to grasp a clue – but can you hold on to it?

          • JohnFLob

            Neither should the rest of us!

          • CR

            As government employees, they work for US. We the people have the right to have an opinion about what the government agencies can or cannot do. Private citizens objecting to a government agency who has no legitimate need for guns training with weapons is very different from a (totalitarian) government trying to disarm the people.

            The Constitution protects the PEOPLE from the government, not the government from the people. Thus, the government cannot infringe upon our right to bear arms but we as a citizenry can limit the power of the government.

          • Joe W.

            Defend themselves?? Bwahahahahahahahahahaha…snort snort…bwahahahahahahahahaha….you are the penultimate assclown.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            Penultimate assclown? So the next assclown after me will be the last one ever?

          • alanstorm

            Thanks for the confirmation, and we certainly hope so.

          • Clete Torres

            God, let’s hope so.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Penultimate assclown? So the next assclown after me will be the last one ever?”

            If only.

          • John Thomas “Jack” Ward III

            DEFEND THEMSELVES?!? Really….REALLY?!? REALLY!?! And us average citizens, especially those who are UN-ARMED, won’t be oppressed into being good little sheeple? Okay, when they start oppressing you, DON’T COME WHINING TO ME!! #RightWard Jawamax 8<{D}

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “It’s not up to them to prove why they need to exercise their rights to defend themselves.”

            100% false when they’re on the job working for the government.

  • Rich

    Make a mistake on your 1040 and get shot.

  • Sean

    Why do we have a department of homeland security and FBI if every other government department is going to have their own LEOs or CRTs?

    • Jack Deth

      Most all of them, including The Library of Congress has a SWAT or CRT Team.

      • NRPax

        So don’t be late in returning your book or it could go very badly for you.

  • CR

    So, let me get this straight:

    The agency in charge of collecting taxes is for some inexplicable reason suddenly in charge of our healthcare, making bad movies that cost thousands of dollars to produce and shooting people with AR-15s;

    The President’s job is to control Seal Team Six and to watch the news and comment on it (but only in secret meetings with select reporters and when answering pre-prepared questions).

    The job of Immigration and Customs Enforcement is, I guess, is to hand out food stamp applications to people crossing over illegally from Mexico (since it obviously is not to enforce border security)

    And the Attorney General’s job is to give guns to Mexican drug lords and to spy on journalists.

    Me thinks the person writing job descriptions for those in the federal government got a tiny bit confused. What did they do, give Joe Biden a list of tasks on magnets and write the names of agencies on black boards?

    • AMSilver

      The IRS is the last beaurocracy (yes, I spelled that wrong, but I’m too tired to look up the right spelling at the moment) that should have weapons. They already get to ignore laws on search and seizure, laws on presumption of innocence, they get to be judge and jury – the last role they should be assuming is executioner.

      • CR

        Don’t fret, they’ll only be killing conservatives so lefties are free to “progress” this country right into the third world dystopia of their dreams.

        So, the good news is, the IRS cannot kill off all their political enemies because there would be no one left to pay for their stupid ideas :)

        • ObamaFail

          If the Dems killed all Conservatives, that’d be getting rid of 85% of tax revenue.

        • HisCrownJewel

          This is true, but it hasn’t occurred to them yet.

    • HisCrownJewel

      You forgot NASA in charge of placating Muslims!

  • Jeremy
  • cynccook

    Probably for the same reason that the SSA needs 174,000 hollow point bullets for 295 agents.

    • Bathing Suit Area

      Why are you worried about these guys preparing to exercise their rights to self defense? Guns don’t kill people, remember.

      • pinkelephant22

        They’re certainly free to on their own time & own dollar

      • CR

        Corrupt totalitarian governments that are out of control (and the agents of those governments) DO kill people on the other hand… Odd how that works…

        • Bathing Suit Area

          So you’re worried about them having guns? You sound like a hoplophobe.

          • JohnFLob

            It is not the weapons that I am apprehensive about. It is the people carrying them and their leaders’ agenda(s).

          • CR

            No, I am worried about a government that is out of control and trying to exercise powers that it should not have.

          • JMC

            We currently have a government that, while actively pushing
            to disarm its citizens, has been going about arming more of its employees. If you can’t grasp the problem here, then you really are obtuse.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            I thought that arming people doesn’t make them dangerous.

          • John Thomas “Jack” Ward III

            Around in circles, this argument goes…
            Where it stops, nobody knows….
            #RightWard Jawamax 8<{D}

          • Squirrel!

            Haha! So funny! After reading the above comment & before I got to yours I thought exactly “talking in circles.” It’s like an argument with my teenager.

          • http://politicallyincorrectcanadian.blogspot.ca/ Reverend Ken

            How long have you been working for PRISM?

      • Rachel

        I don’t care if they have perfume pellets…I don’t trust the IRS as far as I can throw them. The whole Fed is up to no good.

        • Bathing Suit Area

          So your fear is a valid reason to disarm law abiding people who’ve done no wrong?

          • JohnFLob

            WHAT? They much more than ‘law abiding people”.

          • CR

            They are not “people” in this context. They are agents of the government who work for us.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            So corporations are people, but government employees aren’t. Nice.

          • JohnFLob

            “So corporations are people, but government employees aren’t. Nice.”

            That’s correct.

          • CR

            Yup. Corporations are made up of private citizens and they do not work for the government. They work for their shareholders (people) and have rights as independent legal entities made up of private citizens.

            Government agents in the context of their official government capacity are not people. They have different rights and different responsibilities than people do because they are agents of the government when performing work tasks. For example, sovereign immunity rules protect government employees from being personally sued as a result of performing work duties because in that context, they are the agents of the government and not private citizens or people. Just as they get special protections and authorities as agents of the government, we the people can also limit the authority and rights we want them to have.

            When the IRS employee goes home for the night, he or she is a person, a private citizen and can have as many guns as he or she wants in his capacity as a private citizen. The minute that individual begins acting as an agent of the government, however, that person is no longer an individual but is a government agent who works for us.

          • Joe W.

            Congrats. You finally said something that is correct.

          • jas

            C’mon, you guys don’t really think anything silly like citizen’s individual rights is going to get through to someone like bsa, do you?

          • Joe W.

            Targeting people for their political beliefs and leaking personal info about them is not wrong in your feeble mind?? You are a real stupid clown, pal. Obnoxious, as well.

          • http://politicallyincorrectcanadian.blogspot.ca/ Reverend Ken

            Your Taquiyya is showing troll.

          • wwbdinct

            Isn’t that what all the anti-gun zealots problem is? If the IRS wants to arm themselves with AR-15’s, then there should be no opposition to the citizenry being armed with same. Right?

          • HisCrownJewel

            What part of “they are not law abiding people in this context” don’t you get? They are agents of the government, not private individuals. As individuals they may arm themselves, as government agents they may not. It’s a simple concept.

      • JohnFLob

        If I owned a horse that was as lame as that comment the only humane thing to do would have veterinarian put it down.

      • cynccook

        Yep, it’s not the guns I’m concerned about. It’s the same mindset that has our government deciding who is entitled to enjoy Constitutional rights.

      • wwbdinct

        I agree. That is why the citizenry needs to NOT have their right to bear arms restricted in any way by the government. Could not agree with you more. Thank you.

      • Chevypowered

        You know to be a “smart ass” you have to be smart as well.

      • John Thomas “Jack” Ward III

        Odds are, the Gub’mint is gonna fire first….They have more weapons, and more ammo…. #NoBrainerAlert!! #RightWard Jawamax 8<{D}

  • chetnapier

    They are going to be involved with obamacare if i had to tell someone that granny can’t have a new hip i would want some firepower too

  • Rachel

    Is that to go after those who don’t buy into Obamacare? I don’t trust ANYONE who works for Govt anymore.

  • Expose_Dem_Election_Fraud

    They must be planning on taking away the gold soon.

  • Michael Anderson

    The IRS should not have its own law enforcement arm. That’s a big part of the problem, the IRS is a mini dictatorship with no separation of powers to limit abuses.

  • Bathing Suit Area

    Isn’t a gun free zone the most dangerous thing there is? And you want to make the IRS a gun free zone? If everyone in the IRS has a gun, that makes it much harder for any one of them to commit a crime, because the others will all shoot him, limiting the damage. More guns, less murder.

    • sickofitall1096

      Wow your stunning (and by stunning I mean complete lack of) use of logic is mind blowing

    • JohnFLob

      Your comments, individually and collectively, imply that my box of rocks have better logic and more intelligence.

      • Bathing Suit Area

        I’m just following the information given to me by helpful folks here in the gun control threads.

        • JohnFLob

          My rocks win!

    • jas

      Exactly right, assuming that IRS agents will be attempting to shoot innocent citizens. So are they? Eh, you almost got it right, and you don’t even realize it!

  • Jay Stevens

    Hey, everybody. bsa is being deliberately obtuse. Stop feeding the troll.

    • alanstorm

      you’re right but I can’t help thinking that some of these dimbulbs are salvageable.

      I have no evidence of such, mind you. Guess I’m just an optimist.

  • Private

    “but the most transparent administration ever has quite a backlog of questions in the queue.” The word transparent ought to have quotation marks; more accurately, the most OPAQUE administration! P.S. You’re a WP site; moderate comments, but please allow comments from other WP sites without the obstacles!

    Filed under “Big Brother”:

    http://partneringwitheagles.wordpress.com/2013/06/11/judge-andrew-napolitano-who-would-trust-them-after-this/

  • Red

    And the Fed wants to take away your right to bear arms. REMEMBER THIS and FIGHT BACK PEOPLE. We’re talking about your fundamental rights here!

  • JustLikeAnimals

    @RepJeffDuncan Be sure to tell #IRS we’re training with ours, too, and we shoot much better than they do. Bring it on!!!

  • JustLikeAnimals

    @RepJeffDuncan Be sure to tell #IRS we’re training with ours, too, and we shoot much better than they do. Bring it!

    Obama long ago promised to raise a national security force that rivals the military. We saw part of that force roll-out when TP’ers protested outside IRS offices two weeks ago. It’s beginning to happen, folks. Are you ready?

  • 56Survivor

    At this point, the ONLY thing holding this tyrannical government back, is the mystery of how to disarm the citizens of this great Republic.

  • Mongoose

    I’d point out that IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agents – the ones who got Capone and almost every other mobster from 1930 until well into the 1970s when Hoover died and the FBI finally started to get in the game – have been carrying some sort of firearms for decades. IRS CI investigates money laundering, terrorism financing, and other financial crimes in addition to tax fraud and evasion, and spends a substantial amount of time on narcotics and organized crime cases. There are no IRS SWAT teams, but S/As, who have the same job classification as S/As at FBI, DEA, ATF, ICE, Secret Service, etc., do get training on search warrant execution. IRS CI, which has the highest conviction rate of any federal law enforcement agency, makes up less than 5 percent of the organization, and the other 95 percent, including the people in Cincinnati Exempt Organizations, who are Revenue Agents, have no law enforcement authority, don’t carry weapons of any kind, and don’t need them, although IRS employees used to be (I haven’t checked lately) assaulted more than any other group in government.
    Also, Congressman Duncan is probably referring to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, now run by DHS. It was formerly run by Treasury, and created by IRS and other Treasury law enforcement officers.
    I’d point all this out, but everyone’s breathing too hard to hear it, probably. Unless you’re a money launderer or a tax criminal, they’re not “coming for you.” Chill.

    • alanstorm

      Mongoose, I see that you trying to find a rational explanation, but why do you assume there is one?

      Sure, some IRS agents have armed for years. But ARs? Tax evasion is not a violent crime – it’s tough to see a circumstance under which the IRS would need these in an offensive role. And why would they need them in a defensive role? The only scenario I can think of would be where they, or the government generally, has pushed hard enough to elicit a violent response from the population.

      “Unless you’re a money launderer or a tax criminal, they’re not “coming for you.””

      Are you quite sure of that? Ever heard of “SWATTing”? What’s to prevent someone from doing that with the IRS?

      Your faith in the benevolence is naive.

    • Bathing Suit Area

      Quiet, you’re spoiling our alarmist paranoia!

  • kssturgis62

    WE Must have a Civilian Workforce just as Strong as our Military – Obama in 2008 while Running for POTUS.

  • hashbrownies

    Suddenly all makes sense. The IRS, Social Security, NSA, DHS – this is the real civilian army BO was talking about.

  • OLLPOH # UnBanHana!!!!!!!

    Now wait a minute…this has already been solved…The American Eagle Was There don’t you know…