U
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Smart thing to do, but it probably won't get very far:
Utah lawmaker moves to disarm BLM, IRS, says ‘They’re not paramilitary units’
By Cheryl K. Chumley-The Washington Times
Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah, concerned about the armed agents that surrounded Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s property, is mulling a measure to cut funding for any “paramilitary units” that work for the Bureau of Land Management, the Internal Revenue Service and other federal regulatory agencies.
“There are lots of people who are really concerned when the BLM shows up with its own SWAT team,” he said, the Salt Lake Tribune reported. “They’re regulatory agencies. They’re not paramilitary units, and I think that concerns a lot of us.”
His mulled amendment to an appropriations bill comes in context of recent BLM actions against Mr. Bundy: The federal agents armed themselves and surrounded his property, tasered his son, closed down road access to the ranch and even shot a couple of his prize bulls. The reasons? Mr. Bundy hadn’t paid his grazing fees to the federal government, but rather fought the matter in court.
Militia from all over the nation came to the ranch to support Mr. Bundy in his standoff with the BLM — and for that, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid labeled them “domestic terrorists,” various media reported.
The BLM finally backed off and left — but not before a shocked nation expressed outrage at the government’s armed stance against a man who, at the root, was guilty of not paying a bill.
Mr. Stewart said it’s high time the government end its practice of arming its own special units for various agencies, like the BLM and the IRS.
“They should do what anyone else would do,” he told the Salt Lake Tribune. “Call the local sheriff, who has the capability to intervene in situations like that.”
The Interior Department, for its part, said the BLM and National Park Service had armed agents at Mr. Bundy’s ranch to guarantee the safety of the public and of their workers.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-lawmaker-moves-to-disarm-blm-/#ixzz30OJ61MyA
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
[shrug] Federal agencies always have the ultimate backup of "paramilitary units." If the BLM does not have its own, it will use the FBI's or the U.S. Marshal's -- Congress won't cut funding for those.
Bullshit, the FBI wasn't allowed to carry guns until the 30s. These units that the article refers to are a recent addition within the last 15 years or so and no SWAT teams as we know them today existed prior to 1964 except in the military. You should investigate the Defense Authorization Security Act of 1997. It was Bill Clinton who militarized the nations civil police forces with a massive exchange of military technology and equipment to the nations police organizations. In the federal government many agents were armed but the creation of agency SWAT teams within the federal bureaucracy is a relatively new development. The FBI HRT team wasn't even founded until 1982.
During the '08 campaign, Obama had mentioned a civilian army every bit as powerful and well financed as the regular army.
So you now approve of disarming citizens, Vette?
Ermm, no, he didn't, not in the sense you are using the word "army." He was not talking about an armed force but a public-service-volunteer force like the Peace Corps.
He may have used the word "military", not army.
I don't recal him referencing peace corps or anything close to that.
I believe his comment was never clearly explained.
I had read the NOAA and other agencies had their own swat teams with plenty of ammo.
One wonders if the BLM and other agencies all have their own powerfull enforcement teams.
It shocks me that without even knowing what you are referencing you are perceiving the worst for the Sharia Socialist.
If you don't know what I'm referencing, then shut the fuck up.
You didn't know the specific thing you were referencing.
Those who responded knew exactly what I was talking about.
And they said your reference was wrong.