Previous Post
Next Post

Rep. Jeff Duncan must not be very good at Googling. His “revelation” that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is tooled-up is about as new as the “discovery” that Israel is the birthplace of some particularly attractive women. Back in August 2010, TTAG reported on an IRS raid on Tennessee rapper David Darnell Brown (a.k.a. “Young Buck”) where agents were equipped with plenty ‘o shotguns. Here’s a bid solicitation for 60 Remington shotguns for the Tea Party tormentors. All that said, reports that Rep Duncan’s got his knickers in a twist because the IRS has joined law enforcement officers nationwide in switching from scatterguns to rifles . . .

As chairman of the House Homeland Security oversight subcommittee, Duncan (R-S.C.) toured a federal law enforcement facility in late May and noticed agents training with the semi-automatic weapons at a firing range. They identified themselves as IRS, he said.

“When I left there, it’s been bugging me for weeks now, why IRS agents are training with a semi-automatic rifle AR-15, which has stand-off capability,” Duncan told POLITICO. “Are Americans that much of a target that you need that kind of capability?”

You gotta give Duncan credit for seeing an inadvertent fact-finding trip to the range as an opportunity to exploit the [entirely justifiable and historical] anti-IRS sentiment growing throughout the US of A. And using the phrase “stand-off capability.” And anticipating the IRS claim that they need the guns to go after bad guys.

While Duncan acknowledges that the IRS has an enforcement division, he questions if that level of firepower is appropriate when they could coordinate operations with other agencies, like the FBI, especially in a time of austerity. [ED: Joint op with the DEA and U.S. Marshalls above.]

“I think Americans raise eyebrows when you tell them that IRS agents are training with a type of weapon that has stand-off capability. It’s not like they’re carrying a sidearm and they knock on someone’s door and say, ‘You’re evading your taxes,’” Duncan said.

Given the increased scrutiny amid the agency’s targeting of political groups and excessive spending, Duncan said, he intends to seek answers from the IRS.

“We’ll ask the questions and hopefully they can justify it. And if not, we’ll bring them in front of the committee for a hearing and ask the questions on the record,” he said.

Painting the IRS as armed highwaymen? Now that would be fun.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Guess noone remembers when US Postal workers were armed with THOMPSON SUBMACHINEGUNS! To guard the MAIL…not to go postal with…

    • That’s a sleazy-looking MF. And I now understand that only Jewish women are attractive! GOODBYE, America! Your women are all butt-ugly…

    • Mail robberies were so common place in the 1920’s into the 30’s that mail and railroad personnel tooled up. The gangs got so big and well armed that U.S. Marines were detailed to ride shotgun. The robberies mostly ended while the marines were around. A little side note to all this is that the marines had no Thompsons at that time. The postal service turned over a batch of Thompsons, I believe 500+, and a number of model 97 winchester shotguns.

      So for a short time the postal trucks and trains carried a detachment of well armed marines with them.

      • The big difference is that the postal service actually helps the public; I want my personal mail as guarded as my computer and cell phone. The IRS, on the other hand, can work with the USPS or the FBI if they need more firepower.

        • Postal Inspectors are entrusted with guarding/protecting Registered Mails – the most secured form of mailing stuffs within the United States. Several companies and people use registered mail to send and receive precious belonging valued at thousands of dollars. And it is completely insured. So I would really not mind postal inspectors packing some fire power to protect their mails. Think of it as stagecoaches.

          Even Hope diamond was mailed using Registered Mail – it’s that secure.

  2. The issue isn’t that the IRS has AR-15s. It’s that the IRS has new authority and 16,500 spiffy-new agents to poke through your most intimate details starting this November.

    So, while those agents may not be individually armed (one presumes, but then…), they are certainly backed up by a force that is.

    It’s almost like the IRS is expecting some sort of resistance to all that.

    • AND has been testified/demonstrated over the last couple weeks the IRS is insitutionally corrupt and politicized. Yeah – Big news flash.

      • Well, maybe not in and of itself, but taken altogether — including efforts by politicians to exempt themselves and their retinue of staffers from BamsterCare — pretty disturbing.

    • But does the IRS have hot Israeli women? I hear that there’s more hot Israeli women on one Isreali block than all of America!

      SORRY, but this shit is rubbing me the wrong way.

  3. Really? Elliot Ness Type anti-gangster agents are really all THAT necessary today? What with all the new gunslingers in the Dept. of Homeland Security agencies…..Amazing how the powers that be tell America we civilians have no need for such military capabilities, yet they have no problem with civilian agencies acquiring the same UNNEEDED hardware. Hmmm, makes one wonder………….

    • Yes, but the IRS is a federal agency in name only; it’s actually the enforcement arm of the World Bank. Via the “Federal” Reserve.

      LOOK IT UP.

      • So your point has what in relation to my comment? I question the weapons not the veracity or lack thereof of a government institution.

  4. Either AR-15 rifles are in common usage, or they are not. We can’t have it both ways.

    ETA: I’d rather the IRS has self-defense rifles than I don’t….

    • actually i would go a step further – a lot of these government employees have full auto m4 or m16s.

  5. I’m confused, Bloomberg told me the only purpose of an AR-15 is to “kill as many people as possible as fast as possible.”

    I didn’t know the IRS needed that capability.

    • Uurrgh! Don’t you know you’re taking him out of context!
      You must have some seriously twisted logic. It doesn’t
      count in this case because the IRS are our benefactors.
      Why, without the IRS how would the government collect
      the money necessary to fund social programs that you
      will never qualify for or to harass.. er..inspect companies
      that refuse to take government handouts. You must be a
      brainless TEA Party-er. You can inspect a call from the
      local Don and his hit Office.

      • In reality, NOT ONE RED CENT of tax revenue goes to run the nation. Unless you count the Military Juggernaut as “governnent”.

        • You seem to have a rather “unique” view
          of economics. Please go on. I’d love to
          find where the moneys is coming from
          if not from taxes. Here I am thinking
          the annual budget for my firehouse was
          tied in part to the tax assessment and
          taxes received from the area. And maybe
          the state run DOT isn’t using tax money
          for salaries. Since, as you say, no taxes are
          used to keep the nation going, it occurs
          to me that maybe we shouldn’t be paying
          taxes at all.

          If in fact you are referring to the
          government’s inability to generate profit
          and serve only to hinder those that actually
          turn the economic wheels, then I concur.

  6. I guess next time someone asks you why you “need” and AR you can tell them you need it to fight off the IRS.

  7. “We’ll ask the questions and hopefully they [IRS] can justify it. And if not, we’ll bring them in front of the committee for a hearing and ask the questions on the record” — U.S. Representative Jeff Duncan

    Boy, I’m sure that will scare the bejeezus out of them, or not. Worst case someone might get a “negative performance review” on their record which means they will only get a 2% raise this year instead of a 4% raise.

    We need something with some serious teeth to reign in all of this out-of-control government stuff.

    • We’re gonna ask em some questions, and if they don’t answer correctly, we’re gonna get even more seriouser!

      • It’s a page out of the UN’s book, “if you don’t be nice we are going to have to send you a harshly worded letter.”

  8. 50 years ago LEO’s, regardless if they were federal state or local, were men. Usually large men with military service behind them. Now LEO’s can be large, small, male and female. While I have a preference for the shotgun I can understand the trend to the AR in the LEO world. A light short low powered weapon that will not offend the mostly slight statured and inexperienced college kids going into law enforcement these days.

      • But, but, the VP said that a DB shotty was the best defensive gun out there. ARs are just too hard to handle. And you can shoot people through doors with a shotty…I mean the VP said so, right? 😉

        • For the (NSA and TTAG) record, I trust the tactical advice of the P as much as I do the VP. Which is just about nil.

      • Rifles have their place in the LEO world. But we are a mostly urban and suburban people now and the thought of the rifle being the primary go to gun of non military LEO’s makes me a little nervous.

        • I could try and tell you that it shouldn’t make you nervous, but my moral safeguards keep kicking in.

        • 30 round mags being dumped down range in a crowded city, and they all are, is what makes me nervous. The shotgun is a defensive weapon with a slower rate of fire and it’s pellets aren’t as lethal at the range a rifle bullet is.

          Rifles are a tool to have. I would just like to see them used only as a last resort.

        • jwm, would you agree to the following statement: “Rifles have their place in the non-LEO world. But we are a mostly urban and suburban people now and the thought of the rifle being the primary go to gun of non-LEO citizens makes me a little nervous”?

          As someone else already said, either it’s common use or it’s not. If we all want to be able to have our AR15’s with 30 round magazines, it really shouldn’t bother us that LEO’s want them too. After all, isn’t it our stance that none of us need a justification to own an AR15 other than “because i can”?

        • Eateng, I’m not arguing that cops or non cops shouldn’t have rifles. I’m on record numerous times as saying all citizens should have access to these rifles equally. What makes me nervous is anybody, regardless of standing as LEO or not, that see’s the rifle as the go to weapon in a city.

          I have an SKS in my safe. In California I can’t own a 30 round mag. It doesn’t matter to me, my rifle doesn’t figure into any routine self defense scenario for me.

          Now, if it comes down to Mad Max Road Warrior Days, yes, I’m breaking out the rifle.

    • If a government employee must have a weapon, limit them to a six shot revolver and one reload. The cops should be “outgunned”.

  9. Truly sad that this amount of taxpayer money was spent in order to raid a Marijuana dispensary using weapons that responsible American citizens cannot be trusted with. These actions are not increasing the security or safety of our nation. I’m also vehemently opposed to LEOs hiding their faces and names in the course of their duties (undercover excepted, obviously). AKA “weapons of war” with no other purpose than to “kill as many people as possible.” I wonder how many politicians in Sacramento smoke weed. If they have Verizon phones, I suppose I could just ask the NSA, right?

    • It’s cool though. They’ve got a medical card. LeLand Yee must be chomping on some of those pot gummy bears I hear work so well…

  10. Something more important to note is that all these elected representatives in the Senate and House approved the budgets to procure said firearms. So, how could he not know? Same with the DHS ammo buy, Congress knew. They knew because they approved the budgets that are spelled out, line by line, what the money is going to/for.

    Congress holding IRS accountable? It’s overdue that we hold Congress accountable for dereliction of duty/public office. This crap is getting old…

  11. No civilian government employee should be armed, period. If they need help, let them ask an armed citizen.

  12. What this looks like is an effort for the federal government to have a well armed and equipped quick reaction force that doesn’t violate the “posse comitatus” act over the use of the regular armed forces in law enforcement duties.

    I look like almost every federal agency has a SWAT team of some sort.

    • “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. ”

      The Marine Corps and the Navy do not fall under PC. By DoD directive, it applies to us, but not the law as written. Since the law was written in 1878, and revised in 1959 to specifically include the Air Force but not the Marine Corps and the Navy, it follows that this was not a mistake but an intentional omission since bother the Navy and the Marine Corps existed at the time.

      Point is, the federal government already has a well armed, equipped and trained QRF, the employment of which would not violate the act.

      • What are you talking about? The Marine Corps has been around since November 1775 and the Navy since October of 1775. If you want to piss off a Marine, screw up their history.

        Semper Fidelis,

        Devil Dog

        • CharlieKilo: OK devil dog. Reread my post. I specifically said the Navy and Marine Corps existed at the time the bill was written.

          elnonio out!

        • My bad, my apologies, fine sir. Misread it to mean “didn’t exist”. Reading posts too fast on this tiny phone screen doesn’t help. (And apparently making typos)

          However, PC does apply to USMC. It was briefed as part of JTF4 mission planning/prep back in the 90s when we did “training” in AZ.

        • No sweat CharlieKilo.

          As I said, the law itself does not apply, however DoD Dir 5525.5 makes it applicable to all military services, which the directive goes the extra mile to define: “The term “Military Service,” as used herein, refers to the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.” Why? To make sure we all are on the same page.

          Point is, a Marine or sailor would not be prosecuted for a violation of the act, but could be prosecuted for violating orders.

          Lastly, I always thought interesting that the prohibition is really against the person who calls upon the Army or Air Force for law enforcement purposes, but not against the soldiers or airmen. Not enough case law on point to see if the court would extend the plain English reading to the soldiers on the ground.

  13. The IRS enforcement arm should consist of agents pushing paper and working the legal system to collect money owed. When a case goes criminal then bring in a proper Fed LE agency to handle. Need to investigate the criminal? Call the FBI. Need to serve a warrant? Call the US Marshalls. There isn’t one legitimate reason that the IRS needs a single agent armed to perform their duties. Never mind full assault gear and select fire rifles.

  14. Just all part of arming up the alphabet agencies to help DHS,when they start a civil war against the citizens.Be prepared and Ready.Keep your powder dry.

  15. To borrow from Emperor Cuomo: “You don’t need 15 bullets to audit a tax return!!!”

  16. I think what William meant is that income tax monies aren’t used to run the government. These funds so aggressively collected by the IRS are used to pay the interest on the national debt to the Federal Reserve banking system.

    The government has an astounding array of taxes on almost every service provided or merchandise purchased, as well as import duties. This revenue allegedly is used to fund the general workings of the government.

    I don’t believe there are provisions in the Constitution authorizing all these highly armed federal agencies.

  17. How many armed government agencies are there now?

    But seriously, legalize all drugs, let evolution take its course for a few generations, problem solved.

  18. They only issue guns to the IRS and mailmen and such because they know it won’t be long before either Obumma or Hillary will finally declare it illegal for citizens to own weapons, at all.

    With the hardware currently on loan from the US Army to the various states, plus the bodies from the IRS, USPS, BLM, etc all thoroughly spread throught the CONUS… taking down the hostile civilians won’t take more than a day.

Comments are closed.