At Last: A Congressman Looking to Disarm All Those Federal Agencies

We already have a military. We already have a foreign service. We already have a national domestic police agency. We’ve had these things for over a hundred years. So, why does every last federal department need its own automatic machine guns and SWAT teams? Well, they don’t and one Congressman is finally speaking out and looking to disarm all these federal agencies that have unnecessary private armies.

Did you know that the Food & Drug Administration has machine guns and a SWAT team? Did you know even the Department of Education has that, too? We already know that the Bureau of Land Management does. So do the IRS, the USDA, and practically every other piddling, unnecessary federal department.

Why do all these agencies have their own private armies replete with tanks, automatic weapons, and assault teams? Well, you can thank the Bush administration’s push of a provision for arming Offices of Inspector Generals of federal agencies that was stuffed into the 2002 Homeland Security Act.

Well, finally a Congressman is speaking out against this useless, oppressive, and downright dangerous outrage and looking to de-militarize all these federal agencies by introducing a bill to repeal the 2002 provision.

Congressman Chris Stewart (R, UT) has introduced the Regulatory Agency De-militarization Act to take away the power these agencies have to form their own mini armies.

“I understand that federal agents must be capable of protecting themselves,” Stewart said last week. “But what we have observed goes far beyond providing necessary protection.”

Stewart struck just the right tone with his further explanation.

“When there are genuinely dangerous situations involving federal law, that’s the job of the Department of Justice, not regulatory agencies like the FDA or the Department of Education. Not only is it overkill, but having these highly-armed units within dozens of agencies is duplicative, costly, heavy handed, dangerous and destroys any sense of trust between citizens and the federal government.”

“The militarization of agencies is only a symptom of a much deeper and more troubling problem within Washington–that the federal government no longer trusts the American people.”

“I’m working to restore and rebuild trust–beginning with this effort to defund paramilitary capabilities within federal regulatory agencies.”

Exactly right, Mr. Stewart.

Kudos for you seeing the truth, here.

I’ll tell you this much, I’ll agree that every last damn placeholder and federal government leech can walk around armed with fully automatic machine guns when I have that right, too. Until then, only the properly designated policing agencies should be armed like this.

But this should be only the beginning. We also need legislation to outlaw the use of tanks and military equipments by local police, too.

Your local Barney Fife does not need a tank.

Pat Quinn's Major Loss Over Forced Healthcare Worker Unionization
Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners
  • GarandFan

    You’d think the FBI would be sufficient for the entire Federal government.

    • alanstorm

      In general, yes. I can see how some officers might require sidearms for self-defense, but full-auto rifles and MRAPs?

  • JWH

    Your local Barney Fife does not need a tank.

    However, your local DMV DOES!!

    PS. Don’t worry about Barney Fife. He’ll have only one shell for the tank. He’ll keep it in his shirt pocket.

    PPS. If you got that joke, you are old.

  • jim_m

    You left out NOAA. ~200 agents at a cost of $65M per year doing what the Coast Guard was founded to do. Since there is a whole arm of the military for this job I suspect that the NOAA agents have a heck of a lot of time on their hands.

    • warnertoddhuston

      I “left out” a lot of such agencies because a list would take all day to write! LOL

    • JWH

      No, Jim_M, you’re wrong. NOAA agency DOES need armed agents. After all, an armed law enforcement is a necessity when something fishy is going on.

  • Commander_Chico

    I agree 100%.

  • LiberalNightmare

    So, imagine that you are a president that has been elected with high hopes but little actual experience.

    Through a series of dirty tricks and power grabs, you have had some success enacting your agenda, but you’ve also alienated 1/2 the country, are mired in dozens of scandals that are sapping your support and you are about to lose your congressional backstop in the mid term elections.

    The same dirty tricks and power grabs that have moved your agenda forward are also laying the precedent for another President to undo all of your work using the same methods.

    Now you know why police departments have armored cars and the BLM and dept of education have sniper teams..

  • Will Icare

    so…gun control – it’s just for governments now…i can get behind that

  • ljcarolyne

    “Exactly right, Mr. Stewart.” Until this happens, (don’t be slow BTW) we are armed to the teeth in our area. Capiche!