forums

Off-Topic Mass killings

hotshot said:
Maybe the IRS plans to raid the Caymans and get back some US tax avoidance money there in their banks.

Think about it, why would the IRS need guns? Do you think they'll come to your house and threaten you for that late tax return? Or do a spot audit with a gun pointed at your head? If you file your return like I'm sure you do along with the rest of us, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
Click to expand...
Im not losing a bit of sleep man. Im just telling people what is going on.


If you expect me to trust government agencies after the last 4 years i dont know what to tell you. There is no reason a tax agency even has 1 gun.
 
Advertisement
crossover22[]_[] said:
Im not losing a bit of sleep man. Im just telling people what is going on.


If you expect me to trust government agencies after the last 4 years i dont know what to tell you. There is no reason a tax agency even has 1 gun.
Click to expand...
Ever hear of Al Capone? What/how do you think he went to the Fed pen in Atlanta for? Would you have wanted to go unarmed to arrest him for Income Tax Evasion?

But ... I agree and that's the point I've been making -- that the IRS has no need to do what you say they doing.
 
crossover22[]_[] said:
Im not losing a bit of sleep man. Im just telling people what is going on.


If you expect me to trust government agencies after the last 4 years i dont know what to tell you. There is no reason a tax agency even has 1 gun.
Click to expand...
Yep, I trust the USG. And I can say that has always been true for me regardless of which Party was/is in power.

My thought is you shouldn't decide to trust, or not trust, governmental institutions solely based on whether the Party you voted for won or lost. Too often these days, that does not seem to be the case.
 
hotshot said:
Ever hear of Al Capone? What/how do you think he went to the Fed pen in Atlanta for? Would you have wanted to go unarmed to arrest him for Income Tax Evasion?

But ... I agree and that's the point I've been making -- that the IRS has no need to do what you say they doing.
Click to expand...
We have fbi for that.

I just dont believe every government agency should be armed.

Stuff like waco happens.
 
hotshot said:
Yep, I trust the USG. And I can say that has always been true for me regardless of which Party was/is in power.

My thought is you shouldn't decide to trust, or not trust, governmental institutions solely based on whether the Party you voted for won or lost. Too often these days, that does not seem to be the case.
Click to expand...
Ive voted for reps and dems for president.

Bush was a rep and gave us the patriot act. How do you trust a government that spies on you and allows companies to sale your private information?
 
CaneinBroward said:
Why would you make the statement that 70,000 IRS agents will be armed? Why not provide that link as well?

In the links that you did provide, they each mention it will be for the special agent unit as we discussed.
Click to expand...
I think just the "Special Agents" (or SAs) will be armed. How many openings of the 87k will be SAs, I have no idea. I wouldn't think it's 70k, but I don't think they are disclosing that info. TBH, I don't think the Biden Admin wants that to ever come out as they are trying to squash the story... I can tell this cause when I googled "which IRS agents are armed"... I got like 2 pages of FACT CHECKS on how the IRS isn't arming all their agents! LOL! So you know they are trying to kill the narrative

www.washingtonexaminer.com

IRS seeks armed accountants ready for ‘deadly force’

Even before Congress and President Joe Biden give the final OK for the IRS to hire 87,000 more agents in an $80 billion package, the tax agency is revealing a priority job category that could get first dibs on the huge budget expansion.
www.washingtonexaminer.com www.washingtonexaminer.com
 
CaneinBroward said:
Why would you make the statement that 70,000 IRS agents will be armed? Why not provide that link as well?

In the links that you did provide, they each mention it will be for the special agent unit as we discussed.
Click to expand...
How many times do i have to say the irs removed it from its website after it was found out.
 
When you have an armed populace, you need armed enforcement. Why would anyone from a meter maid on up feel safe? Why wouldn't they be entitled to personal protection?
 
Advertisement
crossover22[]_[] said:
How many times do i have to say the irs removed it from its website after it was found out.
Click to expand...
The link to the story you provided stated the statement removed from the website was that "special agents" would have to be willing to use lethal force, not 70,000 agents.

"The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) removed the requirement that special-agent applicants carry firearms and "be willing to use deadly force" from a job listing."

Plus, according to the Treasury Department (take it for what it's worth), 50,000 of the hires are to replace retiring agents. So, it's a net increase of 20-30,000 agents.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/treasury-department-rejects-gop-claims-irs-agents/story?id=88495613

"In a letter to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that the agency also is planning on hiring auditors who can enforce the tax laws against high-income Americans and corporations, not the middle class, along with employees to provide customer service to taxpayers. The majority of hires will fill the positions of about 50,000 IRS employees on the verge of retirement, which will net about 20,000 to 30,000 workers, not 87,000."

To me, it appears that the R's are doing what both sides do when it comes to new legislation they weren't in favor of, they exaggerate the negative for votes. Are there going to be 87,000 agents hired? Yes, but 50,000 of that is for replacing the existing workforce that is retiring over the next 5 years. Are there going to be armed agents? Yes, but it is for a special agent force that makes up less than 3% of the IRS workforce. It's a good way to get votes by stoking fear and both sides are very good at it.
 
CaneinBroward said:
The link to the story you provided stated the statement removed from the website was that "special agents" would have to be willing to use lethal force, not 70,000 agents.

"The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) removed the requirement that special-agent applicants carry firearms and "be willing to use deadly force" from a job listing."

Plus, according to the Treasury Department (take it for what it's worth), 50,000 of the hires are to replace retiring agents. So, it's a net increase of 20-30,000 agents.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/treasury-department-rejects-gop-claims-irs-agents/story?id=88495613

"In a letter to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that the agency also is planning on hiring auditors who can enforce the tax laws against high-income Americans and corporations, not the middle class, along with employees to provide customer service to taxpayers. The majority of hires will fill the positions of about 50,000 IRS employees on the verge of retirement, which will net about 20,000 to 30,000 workers, not 87,000."

To me, it appears that the R's are doing what both sides do when it comes to new legislation they weren't in favor of, they exaggerate the negative for votes. Are there going to be 87,000 agents hired? Yes, but 50,000 of that is for replacing the existing workforce that is retiring over the next 5 years. Are there going to be armed agents? Yes, but it is for a special agent force that makes up less than 3% of the IRS workforce. It's a good way to get votes by stoking fear and both sides are very good at it.
Click to expand...
You are correct on both parties and i truly hope you are correct.

So they are upping the irs staff by 30k with your math. Why?

This was on the irs site.

FZ0D_XxWYAAWn35.jpg
 
crossover22[]_[] said:
I still carry in those places and in court you will win if deadly force is needed.

Those signs are not law. Your 2nd amendment right to protection trumps the store owners fear of guns.

The Indiana mall shooting was in a place with no guns allowed signs. He faces no charges.
Click to expand...
I stay strapped as much as possible. So does my GF, of course she's a critical care Nurse, so she can only carry outside Hospital grounds.
 
crossover22[]_[] said:
You are correct on both parties and i truly hope you are correct.

So they are upping the irs staff by 30k with your math. Why?

This was on the irs site.

View attachment 204770
Click to expand...
They are upping the staff by 30,000 because the IRS has had its funding cut repeatedly for most of the past decade (per the Treasury department statement). I mentioned in another post, I'm still waiting for my refund since I filed via paper. The delays in just processing forms and issuing refunds on paper filings are ridiculous. They still have to process 10 million paper returns for this year as of July 2022. Here is the message on irs.gov regarding refunds:

Paper Return Delays​

If you filed on paper, it may take 6 months or more to process your tax return. For service delay details, see Status of Operations.

My company filed electronically last year and it took over a year to get our refund. They paid with interest, but if we needed the $$$ immediately, we would have been screwed.

As far as that job description goes, they need to do a better job of defining it as one of those special agent positions. You can definitely tell it's LE though with being on call 24/7, on holidays and weekends as well.
 
Advertisement
crossover22[]_[] said:
I still carry in those places and in court you will win if deadly force is needed.

Those signs are not law. Your 2nd amendment right to protection trumps the store owners fear of guns.

The Indiana mall shooting was in a place with no guns allowed signs. He faces no charges.
Click to expand...
Correct. Only a State's statutes can dictate where carry applies.

A private business' signs are nothing more than useless ink on paper.
 
Back
Top