[lacrew]

I’d like to look a little past the ammo purchases, and ask

“Why does the Social Security Administration have armed agents”.

Same with NOAA. The DOL. The VA!?!?

Really, why?

I have a feeling that the growing federal monster prefers to have its own agencies armed...to carry out the non-judicial business of enforcing never voted on ‘regulations’.

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if the Dept of Agriculture didn’t have its own shock troops...and they had to rely on local law enforcement to confiscate raw milk, etc.

Here is a list of some of the armed federal agencies:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/602307/posts

Some favorites from the list - IRS?, HUD!?!, GSA...huh?, HHS - really?.

I don’t care how many rounds an agent might send through a weapon (although I am a bit baffled by the use of hollow points during training....in the Army, we always used ‘ball’ ammunition during training for cost reasons, for example). But, my panties are tightly wound in a knot over the use of federal ‘agents’ with guns.

[Hugin]

If your argument is that there are too many agencies with armed agents, I agree. What's silly is making it sound like 174,000 rounds is some astronomical number for a few thousand agents, or making a hoopla about them being hollow points.

[Hugin]

One more thought regarding the Dept. of Agriculture—don’t they run the National Forest Service? Given that National Forests are being overrun by armed drug cartels, it may not be unreasonable for them to have a SWAT team or two.