Sure Am Glad Armed DHS Officers Were There For The Tea Party Protest.

[santahog]

I may have implied own/lease, which isn't exactly true, but it still boils down to jurisdiction.  As I've said before the FBI has a uniformed division that is only responsible for the Hoover building to the sidewalk around it.  From the sidewalk to the street is Metro DC and the next block is Capitol Police.  As you said it can also be what's inside in addition to other things (owned/leased or shared between local/fed) that determine who's responsible.

Jurisdiction. Responsibility.
It reminds me of folks standing in their yard, filming LE out on the street in front of the house..
It makes me wonder who's "jurisdiction" it is to kick folks door in, whip/shoot their ass, take their guns and take that whipped/shot ass to jail, without "responsibility" for having to justify it in light of the Constitution, (State or Federal)...
Since anybody with government issued kit is happy to do it, I'm guessing that's a question of overlapping jurisdiction, huh..

I'm sure that no LE Agency instructs Agents or Officers to employ "intimidation" tactics to gain "compliance" in a "free, Constitutional Republic". There's no need to employ such tactics on citizens that haven't even been formally accused of a crime, (therefore innocent, by definition).

It's a free country, after all... 

[tombogan03884]

I think you just dribbled some sarcasm on my key board . 

[1911 Junkie]

I think you just dribbled some sarcasm on my key board . 

Is that what that is? Thank goodness, I was worried for a second..............

 

[tombogan03884]

Don't worry Junkie, it cleans up easy and won't short anything out . 

[Magoo541]

Are you REALLY that paranoid?  Why do you have a computer?

Uh... you do realize that the same people that abused power at the IRS are the same people that are running these other Federal agencies?

Ever stopped to think about who actualy OWNS the bulding?  Just because the IRS or Social Security or any other agency is in the building doesn't make it a Federal building.  FPS is the security service for only federal buildings.  Other facilities are leased and responsibility of the locals.  Its called jurisdiction.

I think I saw your name and IP at the NSA Computer Center a couple weeks ago, I know I saw Bogan's

So I can carry a gun into a federal agency's office so long as they don't own the property?   So if it is considered Federal property, much like a rented home would be considered private property of the renters, the FPS would be the security agency in charge/with jurisdiction. 

Why do you feel the need to overlook the obvious?  I understand your LEO background would predispose you to take "their" side but the pattern of abuse by the current regime fly in the face of your position.  Ultimately the sooner you realize that there are real political motivations behind these agencies the less backtracking you will have to do later.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Why do you feel the need to overlook the obvious?  I understand your LEO background would predispose you to take "their" side

He was in MILITARY law enforcement .
In other words he was one of those very "govt agents" that you refer to .

[jnevis]

He was in MILITARY law enforcement
In other words he was one of those very "govt agents" that you refer to .

 I may have been MP, but I've forgotten more actual case law supporting what le can and can't do in regards to jurisdiction and search and seizure than the "sea lawyers" on this forum.

I keep saying it, you guys really need to make up your mind.  You have an expectation that a bank or any other business have some level of security to keep YOUR money, information, et al, safe, but the gov't can't at the same time have security at a building full of your's and everybody else's?  You can have the latest cool AR, but if a cop has one it's militarizing the police force? The police have had military style weapons as far back as the Colt Peacemaker but now it's somehow bad?  The FPS or one of it's predecessors has been in existance since 1790, but since they're DHS, now they're out to get you?  Get a life!  There aren't enough to watch the buildings they're supposed to, they sure as hell aren't watching you. 

[tombogan03884]

I may have been MP, but I've forgotten more actual case law supporting what le can and can't do in regards to jurisdiction and search and seizure than the "sea lawyers" on this forum.

I keep saying it, you guys really need to make up your mind.  You have an expectation that a bank or any other business have some level of security to keep YOUR money, information, et al, safe, but the gov't can't at the same time have security at a building full of your's and everybody else's?  You can have the latest cool AR, but if a cop has one it's militarizing the police force? The police have had military style weapons as far back as the Colt Peacemaker but now it's somehow bad?  The FPS or one of it's predecessors has been in existance since 1790, but since they're DHS, now they're out to get you?  Get a life!  There aren't enough to watch the buildings they're supposed to, they sure as hell aren't watching you. 

That's where you miss the point J, if you were at one of those TEA Party rallies they made a point to find enough who sure as hell WERE watching .
As for the rest of your post maybe YOU expect bankers and cops to keep your stuff safe .
I tend to protect my own stuff, especially from cops and bankers.

[Ichiban]

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/06/swat-team-throws-flashbangs-raids-wrong-home-due-to-open-wifi-network/

I think this demonstrates why people (those paying attention anyway) have a large sense of apprehension about the militarization of the local PDs.  They spend all of this money on cool equipment and training so they actually seem to be looking for opportunities to use it.

As the article states; at the the first (wrong) address they send in SWAT and use flash-bangs, at the second address (the right one) they just send an officer to the door.

I dearly hope this is an anomaly but fear that it is more the norm.  Something like this at my address would probably get me killed.

[jnevis]

That's where you miss the point J, if you were at one of those TEA Party rallies they made a point to find enough who sure as hell WERE watching .
As for the rest of your post maybe YOU expect bankers and cops to keep your stuff safe .
I tend to protect my own stuff, especially from cops and bankers.

No I get the point perfectly.  Just because they are gov't they MUST be doing something bad.  Can't have security guards actually GUARD a building, heaven forbid.  So they're standing out front watching big f-ing deal.  You'd watch too if a bunch of people were standing around in front of where you work just to see what they're doing. 

You obvisously don't protect your stuff very well.  You keep coming on the Internet.  See Ichiban's post as an example.  There is no expectation of privacy on the Internet, and with a minimum amount of skill and equipment someone can steal every dime you can't physically touch, then make it so you can't get any more physical cash.  You guys keep pounding on the gov' "invading your privacy" but then turn around and leave it all online for anybody to see.