The Office of Inspector General is the law enforcement arm of the U.S. Department of Education and is responsible for the detection of waste, fraud, abuse, and other criminal activity involving Federal education funds, programs, and operations. As such, OIG operates with full statutory law enforcement authority, which includes conducting search warrants, making arrests, and carrying firearms. The acquisition of these firearms is necessary to replace older and mechanically malfunctioning firearms, and in compliance with Federal procurement requirements. For more information on OIG’s law enforcement authority, please visit their Web site at : http://www.ed.gov/oig”
Maybe their getting prepared for more realistic problems. In the past 25 years 0 kids have died in school fires (k-12), while over 200 have died in active shooter situations. This in conjunction with fire drills being required by law, schools are under-prepared for shooting situations.
Charles Curran |
March 12th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
RR tried to shut these idiots down. Maybe we should try again?
The article makes it clear. They are buying them because they “are designated as the only shotguns authorized for ED based on compatibility with ED existing shotgun inventory, certified armor and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts.”
You wouldn’t want them to get shotguns that weren’t compatible with their certified armor, would you? sheesh….
So can anyone think of a good reason why the Department of Education would be in the market for 27 shotguns?
Do you know haw many times a DOE inspector has been faced with armed resistance while doing an audit?
That’s right, none. If they didn’t have body armor and shotguns rogue board of education officials around the nation would arm and barricade themselves in the local elementary schools and we’d be staring at dozens of Waco type standoffs annually.
Overwhelming military force is the only thing these NCLB scofflaws understand.
“You wouldn’t want them to get shotguns that weren’t compatible with their certified armor, would you?”
That’s a typo; it should read “armorer”. Their department armorers are trained and certified to work on Remingtons. If they bought a different brand, that would mean a whole new round of training and certification.
Why the Department of Education needs a department armorer in the first place is a whole ‘nother topic of discussion, as is why we even have a federal Department of Education.
I liked Z’s post. it was very informative. but it leaves me to wonder: I’ve never heard of a Dept of Ed assualt. I’ve heard of ATF, FBI, DEA, TSA, C & I, Treasury, Interior, whatever …. all those guys got guns.
but if i’ve never heard of a DoE gunfight, does that mean that this is just ridiculous gov’t spending (bad) or does this mean that there are a whole series of un-reported Federal firefights occurring (worse)?
“The Office of Inspector General is the law enforcement arm of the U.S. Department of Education ”
Why does an educator need a police force? Is school that scary?
While on the subject, why does an educator need a police force with SWAT capabilities? Do you find math lessons sink in better with force?
Also, who will be “accidentally” targeted by the shotguns – bystanders, teachers, students or their parents? Face it folks, they aren’t buying shotguns to mount them on a wall, they intend to use them.
Finally, what policies and procedures are already in place to prevent the above? How much thought has gone into preventing accidents?
You would think, in the rare occasion they actually needed enforcement, they could ask the US Marshal for assistance. That would seem to be more efficient than each agency having its own enforcement people.
(My father spent a couple of decades working for the the US Dept of Labor. He would visit to examine payroll records. Once he was told to leave by a shotgun toting business owner. He returned with a couple of marshals who managed to convince the gent that his shotgun wasn’t a valid exemption from the wage and hour laws.)
I’d bet that the DoE made their own police force because they 1) wanted a higher budget number and bigger empire and 2) because they justified it by saying how difficult it was to work with other federal LE organizations to get the muscle to back up their petty warrants.
I cannot help but recall the key graph from U.S. v. Miller:
In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.
Contrast that with your statement:
The 14″ Remington is pretty much the standard entry gun across the entire broad spectrum of federal law enforcement, since it’s a lot easier to get in and out of vehicles and through doorways with the shorter tube.