Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Ken's Cops: carry guns, arrest citizens, what's next?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    Ken's Cops: carry guns, arrest citizens, what's next?

    Ken's Cops proposal alarms state Capitol
    By: Jeff E. Schapiro | jschapiro@timesdispatch.com
    Published: February 08, 2012 Updated: February 08, 2012 - 12:00 AM

    Ken Cuccinelli is a skeptic on climate change. But his proposal to, in effect, create a police department within the attorney general's office is raising the temperature on Capitol Square.

    "It's turf, turf, turf," Cuccinelli said of the opposition.

    The Republican wants the legislature to allow the 40 investigators in his 83-member Medicaid fraud division to carry guns. They would be issued badges of Cuccinelli's design and — while snooping into misuse of health-care dollars by doctors and nursing homes or abuse of patients — they would watch for, as the bill puts it, "other violations of the laws of the commonwealth."

    The sheriffs don't like it; nor do state police. The former, who are independently elected and powers in their own right, aren't afraid to say so. The latter, with a tradition of independence but accountable to the governor and the AG — in this case, that's the aspiring governor — aren't saying anything publicly.

    To Cuccinelli, the proposal is about common sense.

    To Cuccinelli's critics, the proposal is about his self-importance.

    They say it's empire-building, a poke at local and state police, and a weapon, controlled by the attorney general, against political foes.

  2. #2
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    I sure don't know what the uproar is about.

    The SCC Motor Carrier Division has it's own Cops.
    The State Department of Commerce has it's own Cops.
    The DMV has it's own Cops.
    DGIF has it's own and in fact the Biologists have arrest powers.

    Everybody has their own Cops why can't Cuccinelli?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burke/Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    998
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    I sure don't know what the uproar is about.

    The SCC Motor Carrier Division has it's own Cops.
    The State Department of Commerce has it's own Cops.
    The DMV has it's own Cops.
    DGIF has it's own and in fact the Biologists have arrest powers.

    Everybody has their own Cops why can't Cuccinelli?
    Is this sarcasm, or do you actual support this?

    While I haven't seen the bill (is there one?) or heard anything else about this, I think that I would be likely to support it, at least on one level. I firmly oppose anything that creates separate classes (such as CC without a permit for off duty CAs), but I think that making the means of self-defense available to state employees while they are on the clock is a good thing. This could potentially be a stepping stone to freeing all qualified government employees to carry as they go about their daily work. I think that most of use would support that, just so long as our right to carry is equal respected as we go about our daily lives.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Quote Originally Posted by VApatriot View Post
    Is this sarcasm, or do you actual support this?

    While I haven't seen the bill (is there one?) or heard anything else about this, I think that I would be likely to support it, at least on one level. I firmly oppose anything that creates separate classes (such as CC without a permit for off duty CAs), but I think that making the means of self-defense available to state employees while they are on the clock is a good thing. This could potentially be a stepping stone to freeing all qualified government employees to carry as they go about their daily work. I think that most of use would support that, just so long as our right to carry is equal respected as we go about our daily lives.
    I think the objection is to the fact that the guns are not necessarily for just self-defense. The guns would come with arrest powers and badges. The investigators would also be looking for violations onlaw other than those related to their mandate. I have no problem with them carrying on the job for the purposes of self-defense, just not all that other crap.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burke/Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    998
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    I think the objection is to the fact that the guns are not necessarily for just self-defense. The guns would come with arrest powers and badges. The investigators would also be looking for violations onlaw other than those related to their mandate. I have no problem with them carrying on the job for the purposes of self-defense, just not all that other crap.
    The devil is in the details, and, again, I haven't seen the proposed legislation, but the brief report didn't mention arrest/police powers. Maybe I am over simplify it and only seeing the bit of good. Can you blame a guy for wanting to believe that the government would, for just once, do something because it is actually right, rather than just because it is right for them?

  6. #6
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    I think the objection is to the fact that the guns are not necessarily for just self-defense. The guns would come with arrest powers and badges. The investigators would also be looking for violations onlaw other than those related to their mandate. I have no problem with them carrying on the job for the purposes of self-defense, just not all that other crap.
    The real objection is that these civilians become legally capable of sidestepping the "permitting" process, via Section 18.2-308(C), that most everyone else is forced to submit to -- all the perks without the permits.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    I think the objection is to the fact that the guns are not necessarily for just self-defense. The guns would come with arrest powers and badges. The investigators would also be looking for violations onlaw other than those related to their mandate. I have no problem with them carrying on the job for the purposes of self-defense, just not all that other crap.

    I was serious!
    Nearly every division of the state has it's own mini police department. I don't like a cop on ever corner but if ant Office should have one, The AG's office should be it.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    The real objection is that these civilians become legally capable of sidestepping the "permitting" process, via Section 18.2-308(C), that most everyone else is forced to submit to -- all the perks without the permits.
    Yes, indeed and I concur. It looks like there are now at least two valid objections to this potential action.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    I was serious!
    Nearly every division of the state has it's own mini police department. I don't like a cop on ever corner but if ant Office should have one, The AG's office should be it.
    I stand corrected. Sneaky you. That is not a position that I would expect you to take.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  10. #10
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by VApatriot View Post
    The devil is in the details, and, again, I haven't seen the proposed legislation, but the brief report didn't mention arrest/police powers. Maybe I am over simplify it and only seeing the bit of good. Can you blame a guy for wanting to believe that the government would, for just once, do something because it is actually right, rather than just because it is right for them?
    See here:
    § 32.1-320.1. Powers and duties of unit investigators.

    A. The Attorney General may designate persons in the unit established pursuant to § 32.1-320 as investigators, and any individual designated as an investigator shall be sworn to enforce the provisions of this article and the criminal laws of the Commonwealth, and shall be a law-enforcement officer as defined in § 9.1-101. The powers and duties of such investigators shall include but not be limited to:

    1. The authority to investigate all allegations of fraud in the administration of the State Plan for Medical Assistance administered by the Department of Medical Assistance Services, the provision of medical assistance, or the activities of providers of medical assistance under the State Plan for Medical Assistance;

    2. The authority to investigate allegations of abuse or neglect of adults, misappropriation of a patient's private funds while the patient is in the care and custody of others, and other violations of the laws of the Commonwealth;

    3. The authority to seize evidence of crimes other than those included within subsections 1 and 2 that the investigators may discover while investigating allegations included within subsections 1 and 2, and to transfer such evidence to other local, state, or federal law-enforcement officers.

    B. The Director of the Department of Criminal Justice Services may waive the requirement for successful completion of the law-enforcement certification examination based upon an investigator's previous law-enforcement experience, training, and employment as a law-enforcement officer for a local, state, or federal government. However, no such waiver shall be granted to persons having less than five continuous years of such employment, nor shall a waiver be provided for any person whose employment as a law-enforcement officer was terminated because of his misconduct or incompetence.

    C. The Attorney General shall have the authority to issue a badge to each person designated an investigator of the Attorney General's choosing. The Attorney General is permitted to incorporate use of the Seal of the Commonwealth in the design of the badge.
    They shall be sworn to enforce the "laws of the Commonwealth" because they shall be law-enforcement officers.

    Hence, "Ken's Cops."

  11. #11
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844
    The 40 investigators should have to go through and successfully pass whatever academy that other VA sworn officers have to attend, then there really wouldn't be an issue.

    Just making them another exempt class of gov employees is just wrong, if the masses can't neither should those paid with their/our tax dollars.

    Why can't they just get CHP's, doubt they'll be investigating many medicare claims on k-12 property. If there's a problem with the chp system fix it for them and everyone else.
    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent19 View Post
    The 40 investigators should have to go through and successfully pass whatever academy that other VA sworn officers have to attend, then there really wouldn't be an issue.

    Just making them another exempt class of gov employees is just wrong, if the masses can't neither should those paid with their/our tax dollars.

    Why can't they just get CHP's, doubt they'll be investigating many medicare claims on k-12 property. If there's a problem with the chp system fix it for them and everyone else.
    There is one major problem with that M.
    When I was with the state most of the Enforcement people were ex cops and pretty stupid ones at that. That's why they were EX.
    They hired them because they could bypass the Academy.

    Since the investigations and enforcement was specialized, we ended up with a group of substandard washouts that didn't have the technical knowledge to really do the job.

    The AG's office will be using mostly Attorneys for this if they can. I'd rather see them opt out of the Academy and get qualified people rather one that doesn't need LEO training because he washed out of the Surry Sheriffs Department.
    Last edited by peter nap; 02-10-2012 at 06:37 PM.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    I sure don't know what the uproar is about.

    The SCC Motor Carrier Division has it's own Cops.
    The State Department of Commerce has it's own Cops.
    The DMV has it's own Cops.
    DGIF has it's own and in fact the Biologists have arrest powers.

    Everybody has their own Cops why can't Cuccinelli?
    Because two (or more) wrongs don't make a right... None of those organizations should have their own cops...

    Roscoe
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    these inter-agency "police" are just patronage jobs folks ... I have known special police that have done nothing for years and years. They keep a low profile ...

  15. #15
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844
    While I believe the AG's office should have capable investigators I don't want anymore special class Gov employees, we should get rid of all of the ones we already have.

    Why not just change their job title to comply with 18.2-308 B9 or C for the time being, until we can get those loop holes shut down.
    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  16. #16
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448
    The FBI was originally unarmed until they began getting killed. I don't have a problem with this. They are mostly investigating non-violent crimes, but that doesn't mean a thing. Anybody can decide to off an investigator. It seems to me that this bill seeks to correct an oversight. IMHO if you're investigating criminal offenses, you should be a cop or be with a cop. And I DON'T think this is about the AG's ego. He'll be leaving that job pretty soon.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171

    Nothing new here

    The VA ABC (Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control) has 150 "Special Agents" throughout the state that have evolved from Regulatory Agents and are now sworn LEOs. Currently all must be certified LEOs or attend and successfully pass an academe.

    They also issue badges and guns to the 3 Board members (political appointments).

    Mainly, they investigate liquor license applications and verify that the businesses comply with the ABC regulations but occasionally, the backup local PDs. All ABC Agents drive state provided unmarked vehicles equipped with radios, lights and sirens.

    The AGs office is simply equipping their investigators along the same lines.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    What is next indeed. I RECOMMEND WE BE PROACTIVE AND COME OUT WITH A SCREWED by. THE COOCH SALUTE.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    What is next indeed. I RECOMMEND WE BE PROACTIVE AND COME OUT WITH A SCREWED by. THE COOCH SALUTE.
    Think that such probably already exists for his detractors - isn't good form here though.
    Doesn't contribute to positive redirection or factual contribution either.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Coochi-Kops?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Think that such probably already exists for his detractors - isn't good form here though.
    Doesn't contribute to positive redirection or factual contribution either.
    Ok, how about this. The lead attorney should not have his own police force. I mean really, how would one hold the coochi-Kops accountable? The cooch would never threaten prosecution if someone agreed not to sue the coochi-kops after they screwed up. Why? Because he is a man of his word......... no wait, he is a double crossing politician who covets power. Yeah, give him his own personal hired guns. It worked well for Germany way back when....
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  21. #21
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    585
    Lets see. We carry for defensive purposes. LEO carries for defensive and offensive purposes. Sounds like extra training would be needed and personally we have enough "cops" around. This crap of us and them is old. If they are in a situation that they think that there is going to be violence then the regular cops should be involved. I am waiting for every citizen to be rated on a LEO scale from non cop to full cop.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    SNIP IMHO if you're investigating criminal offenses, you should be a cop or be with a cop.
    There was a time in this great nation where citizens did their own investigating. Where citizens swore out their own warrants, and performed the searches themselves (and the magistrate who issued the warrant paid treble damages if the oath or affidavit did not contain probable cause).

    There was a time in this great nation where the grand jury was not the lapdog of prosecutors and not under the thumb of the courts, and could--and did--investigate whoever and where ever they thought crime existed, without necessarily waiting for a politically motivated prosecutor to bring them an accusation.

    Cops were most definitely not a part of the founding scheme.

    We already have far too many cops, and far too many guns in the hands of government employees.

    Give them guns today, and ten years from now you will have the AG's SWAT team. And, fifteen years from now there will be no-knock raids on Medicare fraud cases because "she was flushing evidence down the toilet."

    Ken's Kops (investigators) can carry guns just like any other citizen. If they want to go to a prohibited place with their personal defense weapon, let Ken get his investigators added to the exemptions from prohibited places just like a cop.
    Last edited by Citizen; 02-14-2012 at 11:48 PM.

Posting Permissions

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