Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Disarm Forest Service Rangers and BLM officials?

  1. #1
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795

    Disarm Forest Service Rangers and BLM officials?

    US Rep. Jason Chaffetz (UT-R) is proposing a bill to remove arrest powers and firearms from Forest Service Rangers and BLM officials.

    Utah TV station KSL is carrying a report on this

    Some fair use excerpts:


    "These agents are more Rambo and less Andy Griffith than I would like," he told the Deseret News Tuesday.

    Chafftez, [would instead] set up a system of block grants to states with a lot of federal lands within their borders to augment local law enforcement response.

    "Let's not kid ourselves. The blood pressure is running high, especially in southern Utah, and I don't want anyone to get killed," Chaffetz said, adding his bill has the endorsement of his Utah colleagues in the House.

    Chaffetz said he also wants to issue subpoenas to the "out of control" federal agencies to learn why they want to purchase submachine guns. He said he has had repeated meetings and sent letters to the BLM's national director, Neil Kornze, with no satisfactory response to his questions.

    ...

    In 2014, Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, announced efforts to defund law enforcement functions of agencies that include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Education.

    ...

    Both Chaffetz and Stewart say potentially volatile situations that merit law enforcement response are best left to the area's local sheriff's offices or police who are familiar with the topography and residents. If tensions continue to escalate — such as the armed ranchers' occupation of a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon earlier this year — the FBI should be called in.

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 03-08-2016 at 06:23 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  2. #2
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    No federal agency (other than military) should be allowed to possess any firearm that the general population is not permitted to poses. No federal agency can justify owning any superior firepower, except maybe border patrol. And then only on the border, not 100 miles inland.

    Just say'n....

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    No federal agency (other than military) should be allowed to possess any firearm that the general population is not permitted to poses. No federal agency can justify owning any superior firepower, except maybe border patrol. And then only on the border, not 100 miles inland.

    Just say'n....
    spot on +100
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    US Rep. Jason Chaffetz (UT-R) is proposing a bill to remove arrest powers and firearms from Forest Service Rangers and BLM officials.

    Utah TV station KSL is carrying a report on this

    Some fair use excerpts:


    "These agents are more Rambo and less Andy Griffith than I would like," he told the Deseret News Tuesday.

    Chafftez, [would instead] set up a system of block grants to states with a lot of federal lands within their borders to augment local law enforcement response.

    "Let's not kid ourselves. The blood pressure is running high, especially in southern Utah, and I don't want anyone to get killed," Chaffetz said, adding his bill has the endorsement of his Utah colleagues in the House.

    Chaffetz said he also wants to issue subpoenas to the "out of control" federal agencies to learn why they want to purchase submachine guns. He said he has had repeated meetings and sent letters to the BLM's national director, Neil Kornze, with no satisfactory response to his questions.

    ...

    In 2014, Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, announced efforts to defund law enforcement functions of agencies that include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Education.

    ...

    Both Chaffetz and Stewart say potentially volatile situations that merit law enforcement response are best left to the area's local sheriff's offices or police who are familiar with the topography and residents. If tensions continue to escalate — such as the armed ranchers' occupation of a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon earlier this year — the FBI should be called in.

    Charles
    Arrest powers ended yes, everyone should be able to keep and bear arms including Forest Service employees and BLM officials, the do not lose their rights because they work for a particular agency
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Arrest powers ended yes, everyone should be able to keep and bear arms including Forest Service employees and BLM officials, the do not lose their rights because they work for a particular agency
    Pretty much my thoughts, actually, pretty dead on.

    They don't need to be LEO's, but they still get to carry guns, same as everyone else, except they only get to use them for the same reasons I'd get to use one.
    Last edited by MAC702; 03-08-2016 at 10:21 PM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  6. #6
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,880
    http://tpwd.texas.gov/warden/connect/special_teams

    take a look at texas' game warden 'teams'...with an armada.

    they are more elite than the rangers.

    ipse

    edited...yes color for law you are absolutely correct in that statement.
    Last edited by solus; 03-09-2016 at 01:04 AM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  7. #7
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    No federal agency should be allowed to possess any firearm that the general population is not permitted to poses.
    This is now the correct statement.

    The military should not be able to own anything that the general population is barred from from owning. The military should be barred from owning many things that the general population should be able to own.

    You've got your wires crossed

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    The military should not be able to own anything that the general population is barred from from owning. The military should be barred from owning many things that the general population should be able to own.
    Can we please avoid hijacking this thread with another round of who should be able to own nukes and other WMDs?

    The thread is about the arrest powers and carrying of guns by Forest Service Rangers and BLM agents. Similar legislation has been previously introduced by another Utah representative to disarm and remove LEO powers from the Department of Education, EPA, etc.

    There is plenty worthy of discussion within the topic of the thread of the proper limits of arrest powers and carrying arms (in an official capacity) of various federal employees and the accumulation of full auto machine guns among federal agencies. Please, not another round of WMDs and nukes.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Arrest powers ended yes, everyone should be able to keep and bear arms including Forest Service employees and BLM officials, the do not lose their rights because they work for a particular agency
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Pretty much my thoughts, actually, pretty dead on.

    They don't need to be LEO's, but they still get to carry guns, same as everyone else, except they only get to use them for the same reasons I'd get to use one.
    I think this is correct with one minor correction. Such government employees working in Western States should be permitted to carry personal firearms for self defense under exactly the same terms and conditions as federal employees working in other parts of the nation.

    Of course, I think most federal employees (excepting federal prison guards and similar) should be permitted to carry personal arms for self-defense just as most Utah State employees are allowed to do (and have been for about a decade now, with nary a problem reported).

    I just don't think federal employees who have grown used to having arrest powers and working in Western States upon vast tracts of public land, should be given special consideration compared to say a park ranger working at Washington Monument in DC or at Faunal Hall in Boston. And I don't think any US Citizen visiting such locations should have any less legal ability to carry personal arms for self defense than do federal employees.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    take a look at texas' game warden 'teams'...
    How Texans choose to handle their own LEOs is an issue for Texans, and not relevant to this thread which is dealing with federal employees exercising police powers over vast areas inside Western States.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  11. #11
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Can we please avoid hijacking this thread....snipp?

    The thread is about the arrest powers and carrying of guns by Forest Service Rangers and BLM agents. Similar legislation has been previously introduced by another Utah representative to disarm and remove LEO powers from the Department of Education, EPA, etc.

    There is plenty worthy of discussion within the topic of the thread of the proper limits of arrest powers and carrying arms (in an official capacity) of various federal employees.... snipp.

    Charles
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    snipp.

    Of course, I think... just as most Utah State employees ....

    I just don't think ....snipp ...any US Citizen ....snipp.

    Charles
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    How Texans choose to handle their own LEOs is an issue for Texans, and not relevant to this thread which is dealing with federal employees exercising police powers over vast areas inside Western States.
    hummm, mate, how do you mean "not relevant" ...like the your mention of 1) another UTAH representative for Dept of Ed & EPA; 2) UTAH state employees; 3) any US citizen...

    ok, mate you win, you're correct those topics aren't relevant...so why did you post irrelevant references??

    never mind, i know why...

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Hayes View Post
    Arrest powers ended yes, everyone should be able to keep and bear arms including Forest Service employees and BLM officials, the do not lose their rights because they work for a particular agency
    Nor do they automatically "get" to carry due to a specific employment!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    Nor do they automatically "get" to carry due to a specific employment!
    Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking and only half-articulated. Their gun shouldn't be a 'part of the uniform.' Just a tool they get to carry by virtue of being a relatively free American, like us.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  14. #14
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Do ACOE get to carry a government gat? They might, I don't know. Never seen one though.

    Heck BATF&E, DEA and other such derivative fed agencies should be stripped of their arrest powers and guns to be relegated to state/county/local advisory positions. Provide intelligence and other such mundane tasks. The locals are gunned up enough, we don't need feds screwing over our local yokels.

    US Marshal Service and G-Men (FBI and SS) only to have guns.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    Nor do they automatically "get" to carry due to a specific employment!
    Exactly
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    The military should not be able to own anything that the general population is barred from from owning. The military should be barred from owning many things that the general population should be able to own.
    That's a great way to render our military exceptionally ineffective, Freedom1Man. What's next? Sending our enemies engraved invitations to commit invasion?

    Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

    Personally, I have no problem with armed U.S. Forest Rangers. I've known a few. Met a few others, and run in to half a dozen in the woods over the years while we were both carrying. All have been perfect gentlemen.

    As for the BLM, however, they were created -- un-Constitutionally -- to fill a power void that never should have existed in the first place. Commensurate with Article I, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment, the feds are not authorized to own any land other than the specified "District (not exceeding ten Miles square)" and "Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." Even then, the feds can only purchase such rather restricted lands "by the Consent of the Legislature of the State" in which that land might be. Federal ownership of vast swaths of land throughout the mid-West and West is patently un-Constitutional.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    [ ... ]As for the BLM, however, they were created -- un-Constitutionally -- to fill a power void that never should have existed in the first place. Commensurate with Article I, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment, the feds are not authorized to own any land other than the specified "District (not exceeding ten Miles square)" and "Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." Even then, the feds can only purchase such rather restricted lands "by the Consent of the Legislature of the State" in which that land might be. Federal ownership of vast swaths of land throughout the mid-West and West is patently un-Constitutional.
    Well said!

    While I was rock climbing in Yosemite in the Sixties, the NPS rangers visiting our Camp 4 would complain of having drawn the short straw and having to wear THE gun.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  18. #18
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202
    Carry fine. No deprivation of self-defense, but not government powers of arrest.

  19. #19
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Well said!

    While I was rock climbing in Yosemite in the Sixties, the NPS rangers visiting our Camp 4 would complain of having drawn the short straw and having to wear THE gun.
    How true. Did a wee bit of hunting back in SC this past November. After taking a doe I returned to my truck to get my 4-wheeler and a game warden was waiting next to my truck. Good morning, I said, mornin he said. Been huntin? Yepper, I said...can ya give me a hand unloading my 4-wheeler? Sure? What? Hold my shotgun while I drop the ramps on the trailer...he declined and dropped the ramps.

    Had a good conversation, shared some lukewarm coffee and a honey bun. When I got back with the doe he was still waiting, check my doe tag and went about his business. Nice fella.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  20. #20
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    In United States constitutional law, police power is the capacity of the states to regulate behavior and enforce order within their territory for the betterment of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of their inhabitants under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
    The government, then, of the United States, can claim no powers which are not granted to it by the constitution, and the powers actually granted, must be such as are expressly given, or given by necessary implication. On the other hand, this instrument, like every other grant, is to have a reasonable construction, according to the import of its terms; and where a power is expressly given in general terms, it is not to be restrained to particular cases, unless that construction grow out of the context expressly, or by necessary implication. The words are to be taken in their natural and obvious sense, and not in a sense unreasonably restricted or enlarged.
    Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 US 304 - Supreme Court 1816

    I have never found in the constitution where the Federal government has any police power. And you won't because federal regulation arises not under a police power, but under the authority to regulate interstate commerce. And the feds try to justify their actions under the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution. Remember, the USSC allows the feds to violate the constitution.

    I'm just say'n....

  21. #21
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    That's a great way to render our military exceptionally ineffective, Freedom1Man. What's next? Sending our enemies engraved invitations to commit invasion?

    Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

    Personally, I have no problem with armed U.S. Forest Rangers. I've known a few. Met a few others, and run in to half a dozen in the woods over the years while we were both carrying. All have been perfect gentlemen.

    As for the BLM, however, they were created -- un-Constitutionally -- to fill a power void that never should have existed in the first place. Commensurate with Article I, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment, the feds are not authorized to own any land other than the specified "District (not exceeding ten Miles square)" and "Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings." Even then, the feds can only purchase such rather restricted lands "by the Consent of the Legislature of the State" in which that land might be. Federal ownership of vast swaths of land throughout the mid-West and West is patently un-Constitutional.
    Oh, so where did you get the power to grant others powers you do not first have?

    We the people are supposed to be better armed that any army that the government could call forth.

    We are not to even have a standing army in the first place. So, how would my demand be so bad? How would having our citizens better armed that our military be inviting foreign invasion?
    Or are you the type that believes that you can trust the government to take care of you?

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  22. #22
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    We the people are supposed to be better armed that any army that the government could call forth.
    Citation?

    The quotes from the Founding Fathers I've read suggest numerical superiority, not necessarily better equipment.




    "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
    - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

    "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
    - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

    “A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
    - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

    "[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."
    - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788

    Equal in training and discipline. Superior in numbers. Perhaps possessing greater motivation.

    But nothing about the people having better arms or more sophisticated arms than the government can possess.

    All of which is moot to this thread as we're discussing Forest Service, BLM, and perhaps other federal agencies with LEO powers, and whether they should have such powers and be carrying small arms generally available. The exception, would be full auto guns that some agencies seem to be stockpiling.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    I will have to go back through my reference books again.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •