Police State: EPA Raids in Alaska Exposes Heavily Armed Federal Agencies

We’ve talked about the police state that is being built right under our very noses many times. But a recent raid on Alaska mines by the EPA is proof once again that far too many government agencies have para-military, heavily armed divisions. And they need to be curtailed.

Did you know that 40 federals agencies have 120,000 full-time agents that are allowed to carry guns?

Did you know the Library of Congress and the Federal Reserve Board have armed divisions?

Why do librarians and bankers need to have SWAT-styled divisions with automatic rifles, body armor, and armored assault vehicles? They all do, you know?

The incident in Alaska was typical, too. The EPA broke out their SWAT-styled fully automatic machine guns, their black body armor, and their jack-booted military operatives to raid a tiny mining community because someone may have violated the so-called safe water act.

Seriously. The government sent paramilitary EPA forces to see if someone was making dirty water.

One miner thought the whole thing was surreal.

“Imagine coming up to your diggings, only to see agents swarming over it like ants, wearing full body armor, with jackets that say ‘POLICE’ emblazoned on them, and all packing side arms,” gold miner C.R. Hammond told the Alaska media.

MrConservative readers might remember the incident in Wisconsin where the state Fish and Game Department sent a heavily armed, SWAT-styled team to a local animal shelter because they had “illegally” taken in a wounded fawn and were trying to nurse it back to health.

The fact is, too many state and federal agencies have a license to kill we the people. We need to start taking these powers away from government as it sets up a barrier between us and them whereby they imagine they have the power to hold us at gunpoint whenever they want to. WE are the employers, here. THEY are not our masters.

BOYCOTT: Starbucks CEO Lies About Not Being Anti-Gun
Great Economy You’ve Got There Mr. President
  • Commander_Chico

    Your timing is impeccable – right after the Navy Yard rampage.

    Although I agree with you on SWAT tactics.

    • Walter_Cronanty

      And a heavily armored EPA SWAT team [EPA SWAT team, WTF?] raiding Chicken, Alaska to investigate possible violations of the Clean Water Act is related to a situation where a completely insane wackjob, who had clearance to enter a US military facility, was murdering innocents while a highly trained unit of the Capitol Police was reportedly blocked from responding to the scene – exactly how?

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        A Military Facility whose servicemen remained un-armed due to a Clinton era policy.

        • Walter_Cronanty

          I blame the “stand-your-ground” law.

        • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

          Well, to be honest – they had the same regulations going on at AF bases in the ’70s. You could own rifles and handguns, but you had to check them in and keep them at the SP armory. (Heard some interesting stories about rifles that would go in clean, and then be checked out again three months later dirty… as if someone had taken it to the range and not bothered to clean it afterward… and things like scopes being lost.)

      • jim_m

        You talk like people dying at the hands of a mad gunman are a problem. How on earth is the left going to advance its agenda if it doesn’t have piles of the dead bodies of innocent civilians to stand upon?

        • Walter_Cronanty

          Now that you mention it, Alexis Aaron was a liberal Obama supporter, wasn’t he?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I do believe the recent evidence supports your belief…

    • warnertoddhuston

      I really don’t see the two situations at all alike. Expecting a military base to have enough armed security to safeguard its facilities is nothing like government agencies going out into public using SWAT-styled tactics.

      • LiberalNightmare

        It does seem a little uneven that professional soldiers aren’t allowed to be armed on base, while EPA ‘agents’ roll around in full swat gear.

        • jim_m

          Naturally. Because the federal bureaucracy is filled will lefties and they are not a threat to the federal government, whilst the military is filled with more conservative patriotic types and THEY are not to be trusted with weapons unless Dear Leader can send them overseas to die in his name.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          Given that the front line of the war on terror is EVERYWHERE I think all members of the Armed Forces should go armed at all times and in all locations.

          • Commander_Chico

            Ha, the front line is everywhere, watch out! Good reason to arm Seaman Timmy, Private Bailey and Private Pyle, it will make us safer.

            Would they have to bring their guns to the dance club on Saturday night? Would they have LE authority?

          • LiberalNightmare

            Spoken like true(?) veteran

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Soi disant veteran, at any rate.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            He claims to be from that era which still included McNamara’s 10,000.

          • Commander_Chico

            Nah, the 100,000 project was long gone when I went in.

            I did meet quite a few dolts in the military, however.

          • jim_m

            Sounds like a self awakening.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Everytime you faced a mirror…

      • Commander_Chico

        About every federal agency there is responded to the Navy Yard. I saw U.S. Marshals, FBI on TV. The Capitol Police was there, too.

        Don’t you think the Federal Reserve (which distributes all cash) needs security? The Library of Congress, which has the originals of the Constitution and Declaration, plus lots of other rare stuff?

        For a country of more than 300 million, 130,000 is not that much. I’d rather they be in separate agencies rather than all under “Homeland Security.”

        It’s what they do that’s a problem, not how many there are.

        • Jwb10001

          Wonder if Gary Johnson would feel the same way about building up a bunch of federal jack boots to keep the population in line? I suspect not. I would suggest a libertarian would be very distressed about these developments. Having armed security forces built up in all these non security chartered federal departments sounds like a bad idea to me. For someone that claims to be a libertarian you sure do seem to like the idea of big federal government with lots of power and lots of guns. I’m not sure libertarian means what you think it does.

  • LiberalNightmare

    … but remember, no one wants to take your guns away.

  • Lawrence Westlake

    This really is a tinfoil blog post. The demographics of the Internet’s chattering classes truly are surreal. People whose toughest decision on a daily basis might be Charlie Trotter’s vs. Chicago Chop House bloviating about the “police state” evidenced by a state and federal raid in Nowheresville, from which it’s determined, gee whiz, the federal gumbmint has and uses armed police forces in police actions. No shit, Sherlock. Then in the next breath, of course, to add irony to idiocy, the same people reflexively and incessantly complain there aren’t enough armed federal police, or even troops for that matter, roaming near and around the Southern border, to keep out Paco, the gardener, and to jettison Guadalupe, the hotel maid. Which is it, Cochise? Do you want a big federal police bureacracy (to fight against illegal immigration) or do you not want a big federal police bureacracy (not to enforce other duly-enacted laws)? Unreal. In any event, obviously the federal government grew far too big and way too expensive and heavy-handed. Politics has ripple effects. Ask Ross Perot. Ask the people who stayed home in ’08 and didn’t vote, rather than “sullying” themselves by voting for McCain. By now even their ilk have figured some of this stuff out. Or not.

    • jim_m

      Are you really that thick?

      Yes we want armed federal agents to guard the border. No we don’t want armed federal agents working for the IRS, EPA, Dept of Education, Dept of Energy, etc. What has happened is that every administrative agency has declared itself a law enforcement agency and declared that people who violate the laws it makes to be violent offenders requiring paramilitary police action to take them down.

      There is a difference between the EPA and the freaking border patrol. If you are incapable of perceiving the difference then no one can help you.

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        No point engaging flings poo and flees.

    • Walter_Cronanty

      Good lord, you’re conflating some schmuck dumping muck in the water with well-armed Mexican drug cartels smuggling drugs/people across the border. Yes, we want armed border guards. No, we don’t want EPA/Library of Congress SWAT teams.

    • LiberalNightmare

      Wow

      Open with an insult, present a false choice, then use the conclusion to change the subject.

      Awesome post.

    • Jwb10001

      Wow I didn’t know that the EPA was chartered to protect the border. You know the federal government actually has a responsibly to protect the border, no so much to raid American companies with armed forces to issue some EPA BS complaint right?

  • sgosher

    Good luck curtailing them.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE