They Need Them Because Raw Milk And Heirloom Seeds Are Dangerous

Given that it seems that every Federal agency has an Office of Inspector General with armed law enforcement officers and a SWAT team, I guess this solicitation by the USDA OIG isn’t too surprising.

Solicitation Number:                                              



Added: May 07, 2014 2:03 pm

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General,
located in Washington, DC, pursuant to the authority of FAR Part 13, has
a requirement for the commerical acquisition of submachine guns, .40
Cal. S&W, ambidextrous safety, semi-automatic or 2 shot burts
trigger group, Tritium night sights for front and rear, rails for
attachment of flashlight (front under fore grip) and scope (top rear),
stock-collapsilbe or folding, magazine – 30 rd. capacity, sling, light
weight, and oversized trigger guard for gloved operation. 
SOLICITATION DOCUMENT EXISTS.  All responsible and/or interested sources
may submit their company name, point of contact, and telephone.  If
received timely, shall be considered by the agency for contact to
determine weapon suitability.

Beyond the question of why they even need them which is highly debatable, the solicitation has got me to wondering about semi-automatic submachine guns. Aren’t they an oxymoron? Perhaps the contracting office didn’t want to use the term “assault rifle” or “assault weapon” and just decided that “submachine gun” was a kinder, gentler way of saying they wanted a bad-ass looking firearm to put the fear of God and the USDA into those damn farmers. Given the vagaries of Federal acquisitions, who knows for sure.

Welcome To The Party, Guys!

The average Californian who wants to own a firearm especially a handgun has to deal with a whole host of rules and regulations that are enough to make your head swim. Now, in what can only be termed schadenfreude, so too must Federal law enforcement officers stationed in the state of California.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris, deemed by Obama to be “the best looking attorney general in the country”, has changed the policy of the Department of Justice that previously exempted Federal law enforcement officers from Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. She determined California law had not carved out an exemption for them.

California gun law attorney Chuck Michel has this to say about the issue:

California citizens are just as frustrated as federal law enforcement officers with the situation. When the roster of available pistols they can purchase dwindles down to a limited few – because manufacturers are refusing to implement “microstamping” – federal law enforcement’s objections will grow louder. And if pending legislation (SB 293) concerning “smart guns” passes and is signed by the Governor, federal law enforcement will also be forced to choose from an even more limited number of models … just like civilians.

Forgive us mere civilians if we aren’t completely sympathetic to the plight of the feds.

The Feds predicament stems from a recent (and correct) change in the Attorney General’s interpretation of existing California law. While California law restricts the sale of “unsafe handguns” by dealers, there are some exceptions to the restriction. The exception used by most law enforcement agencies and officers, and the one used until recently by federal law enforcement officers, was the following:

The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the pistol, revolver, or other firearm is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, any police department, any sheriff’s official, any marshal’s office, the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency, the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney’s office, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.

Pen. Code, § 32000(b)(4)

You might notice, as did the California’s Attorney General, that federal law enforcement officers are not mentioned in this exception! The “Department of Justice” referred to in this section is the California Department of Justice, not a federal agency. So the AG’s analysis is correct: federal law enforcement is not exempt from the “unsafe handgun” restriction.

 He has much more on the issue here.

Undercover Feds At SHOT Show?

In today’s The Outdoor Wire, there was a report that undercover Federal agents from BATFE, the FBI, and the USAF Office of Special Investigations were spread out amongst the crowds at the SHOT Show in Las Vegas. They were leaving cards that said to “report suspicious activity”.

As the industry poises for the Obama administration, word spread through SHOT Show that undercover agents supposedly from a variety of different agencies, from ATF to OSI, were wandering around the show floor, passing out business cards that bore an official-looking seal and the words “Suspicious Activity Reporting: 702-690-9142”

Curious, one industry insider called the number. After several rings, a recorded message thanked him for reporting the suspicious activity, and asked for a callback number. Instead, he hung up. Only a few minutes later, their cellphone rang and a caller identified himself as an FBI agent following up on the “suspicious activity report”.

When questioned about the supposed federal agents wandering the floor, the caller said that despite the fact that OSI was a military agency, breaches of security when it came to the “kinds of equipment displayed at SHOT Show” gave them full domestic arrest powers.

Many attendees at the SHOW have received these cards, raising questions of the legitimacy of the supposed agents and the possibility that SHOT was under far closer federal scrutiny than normal.

This report doesn’t leave me feeling warm and fuzzy about President Obama’s claims that responsible gun owners have nothing to worry about from him.

Quote Of The Day

Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal published an article which described the growth of Federal police ranks especially in the agencies not traditionally associated with law enforcement. When you have 5 criminal investigators for the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and 7 for the Government Printing Office, I think you have a problem. I think Ronald Gainer, a former Justice Department official, hits the nail on the head.

Skeptics also say some of these smaller departments tend to wield their powers indiscriminately, even for seemingly minor infractions, in ways that seem self-justifying.

“When you start making innocuous actions crimes, you multiply the number of people who are enforcing” the laws and regulations, says Ronald Gainer, a former Justice Department official for Democratic and Republican administrations who has cautioned for years against the proliferation of federal law. “You multiply the number of people who have to enforce criminal laws and they all want guns.

As Tam said earlier this year after the Department of Education SWAT team raid in California, “Look me in the eye and defend this.”