IRS Job Listing: Special Agents Must ‘Carry a Firearm and Be Willing to Use Deadly Force’

What next? Sidearms and body armor for DMV employees? Hand grenades for toll booth attendants? Maybe crew served machine guns for sewer workers? Close Air Support on call for Forest Rangers? Artillery Support for workers in the Small Business Administration?

 

There was a notice of an ammunition purchase by the IRS, something like half a billion rounds... Why on earth would the IRS need with that much ammunition?

 

As the Dems consolidate federal agencies, the Universal Federal Agent of the new "American Gestapo" will need plenty of ammo to keep American citizens subdued and under complete control.

 

The Dems scream bloody murder about the 2nd Amendment but *******n when it comes to the government being armed to be able to shoot/kill civilians over a tax payment issue, they are 100% on board with that. It's ****ing disgusting and overall retarded.

Furthermore, for ALL of you that think the financial system going full digital is a great idea, one click of a keyboard does just as much damage as a bullet.

 

You make a fair point, but you seem to miss the point that IRS agents are government agents.

 

It sure does seem that way. Perhaps our lefty poster friends can help us understand the consolidation of federal policing powers given their reluctance to allow policing in any functional way outside of government, you know, like crime, murder, etc.

 

Organized crime doesn't have the courts for recourse, so they kill people. Tax evasion is often the easiest crime to prove against organized crime.

 

Breitbart... lol

Yeah, the IRS is coming to get you.

 

Its not 'American' Bob. The language is English.

And while there is a possessive apostrophe in the term 'Yep, Biden’s IRS wants to murder U.S Citizens . . . Let’s go Brandon!' its use is this instance is completely incorrect. The possessive doesn't apply because, and I hate to have the the one who tell you this Bob but no US President, including Biden actually possesses/owns or otherwise directly controls any US government agency, including the IRS. That's not how the US Constitution works.

And for your information the current Head of the IRS, a Mr Charles P. Rettig was appointed in 2018 by Donald Trump, not Joe Biden with the approval of the Republican controlled Senate. He is also most assuredly not some Democrat apparatchik, do some research on the topic.

But none of that really matters Bob. Because even if it was true that Biden or indeed any other US President actually did at law own/control the IRS you still haven't produced a shred of evidence that Biden wants the IRS to 'murder' US Citizens. And use of the term murder implies intent Bob. So put up or shut up, prove Biden wants the IRS to murder people. For a man of your intellect and insight that shouldn't be difficult.

One final point I need to correct out of all the drivel you've posted. This bit. 'The Criminal Tax Lawyer is the subject matter expert in in Criminal Tax Law.' No Bob, that's not correct.

The lawyer in any investigative agency is the subject matter expert on the relevant legislation. The investigator working the case is the subject matter expert on the specifics of that case - because he is the who has collected all the evidence and built the case to the point where warrants are needed. He or she is also the one who normally drafts, executes or attends warrants on behalf of the agency concerned, even if the contents of the warrant application are reviewed by an in-house lawyer first, prior to being authorized by a judge. In some sensitive or important cases an agency lawyer might attend a warrant in an advisory capacity but the lead case officer is always the person in charge on the scene and the one who has to make all the important decisions absent instructions from elsewhere. If present or contacted all the lawyer can do is provide advice. That's how it all works Bob, that's the reality. The investigator is the one who builds cases, executes warrants and other court orders as needed and carries the firearm, but State mandated murder isn't part of the job description.

 

So in other gun threads, citizens should be allowed to protect themselves using a firearm. But when its the IRS, somehow its about killing others.

I think we can all agree that the IRS is one of the more hated of the govt arms...kinda makes sense that they might want the ability to protect themselves in today's environment.

 

Tell Bob.

 

True, but the weapon is carried pursuant to certain duties they are obliged to perform at certain times. In those circumstances it becomes a work tool. And the fact that they are government agents means they are at least required to pass regular accuracy and practical shooting tests, something the average citizen is not obliged to do when deciding whether or not to to carry a firearm.

So if anything? You could I suppose argue that makes it safer for them to be the ones carrying than it does some random, untrained civilian. It certainly won't make them more of a risk to the public general public than the average Joe. (Unless of course your 'Bob' and think it's the IRS's job to hunt down and kill random citizens for fun and profit.)

 

Now that's just silly.

 

Yes, you're finally understanding. The government doesn't have the right to defend itself from the people. The people have the right to defend itself from the government. When you reverse these roles, the following is eventually the result.



Now, if as individual IRS agents want to arm themselves, I have no problem with that.

But, when "willing to use deadly force" is the main job description, that's a big problem. There is no reason to use deadly force to collect taxes. Period.

No one has yet to give a good example of when this is needed.

Most people don't hate the IRS. They love the IRS. 99.9% of Americans happily fill out their tax returns without a single complaint. I like the IRS. That's why I don't think 70,000 of them need to be placed in a position where "willing to use deadly force" is their main job description. Eventually, when you are forced to carry around a firearm and told willing to use deadly force is you main job description, someone's going to get killed.

Take Kent State. Do you honestly believe the National Guard soldiers woke up that day and said to themselves,"I'm going to kill some college students."?

No, they didn't. However, those in charge set up a situation where that was eventually bound to happen. Give a bunch of soldiers loaded guns and send them to a college demonstration. What do they think was going to happen?

And that's what's happening with the Biden administration. The Biden administration is setting up the situation where eventually, people will be killed.

But you may ask, "What about the 0.1%?" To which I would reply

The IRS did not need firearms to arrest Al Capone.

 

Find the job description for the Postal Service which lists "willing to use deadly force" as a main job duty.

Here, look for yourself.

https://postalhiringservice.com/jobs/

How about for a Texas State Trooper?

https://www.dps.texas.gov/section/training-operations-tod/trooper-duties

A LEO should never willingly use deadly force.

 

since I’ve been an leo and worked with federal agencies, let me help.

“willing to use deadly force” isn’t a main job duty and this is being taken way out if context. Waaaaay out. It could also say willing to work for **** pay, or several other things that are inherent to realizing that may be a part of the job. They’re federal agents with arrest authority and that means carrying a weapon.
Yes, an leo SHOULD be willing to use deadly force when it’s called for. It’s not something you’re looking to do, but you realize that may not be your decision when some idiot forces your hand.

 

How many employment positions include those requirements?

 

Why do people who are supposedly law enforcement always have to make it personal by using the logical fallacy of appeal to authority?

I completely agree. It shouldn't be listed as a main duty. I would go further and say it shouldn't be listed as a duty at all. Just look at the Texas state trooper website. Do they list “willing to use deadly force” in their job description? In fact, I would go further and state that those willing to use deadly force should not be in law enforcement at all.

If someone leaves you no choice and forces you to do something, are you willingly doing it, or unwillingly doing it.

 

I do understand your point, but must ask the question 'why on earth do we need 85000 new IRS agents?' Wouldn't it be better to spend that money on Border Patrol and Immigration? That's where the crisis is, along with too damn much federal spending on foolish things like sending US tax dollars to Zelensky and his cronies including the Grifters Biden.

Last night on Fox, somebody claimed that the record shows that armed IRS have had 11 accidental discharges of their sidearm during a certain time period I cannot remember. During the same time period there were -0- intentional discharges of those weapons in the line of duty.

If true, it sounds like it's not really a good idea to arm accountants working for the IRS.

 

I Was just trying to let you know that despite what the appearance of the job post, what it really means.

If you think law enforcement people should not be willing to use deadly force you have no basis in reality, said person is "willing" to do the task because often lives are on the line and you don't have time to **** around with whether you're "willing and capable" of solving an ugly problem. One must consciously know that if that decision must be made you're capable of it. No one is trying to mistake "willing" with "hoping you get to shoot someone" when you go to work every day.

 

They're special agents, not accounts reviewing your return. Why is Gaetz whining?

 

The IRS should "hunt down" people who don't pay their taxes. What's your beef? Don't you think IRS agents should be able to protect themselves—and each other?

 

If that was all the agents do, they wouldn't require guns.

 

Says who? You? What do you know?

Not every potentially violent tax cheat is a drug dealer.

What about other tax cheats?

 

Propaganda Alert!

This is really stupid stuff.

What is it "leftists" (who are these "leftists" you're talking about?) want? Koresh was s pervert who torched his compound.

Fifteen years they watch the guy? Fifteen years? Why not cut the guy off from food and water?

So, you figure the usual IRS MO is to use guns?