Re: Ping: Jim (Napco PCI-Mini)

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

Robert L Bass wrote:
> "Robert L Bass" wrote:
>>
>> The Title 10 bill is intended to give wildlife officers...
>
> Sorry, that was supposed to read "originally intended".  Early
> discussion of the bill (or one similar) by its co-authors centered
> around "fish and game", etc. The actual bill covers a broader spectrum
> of federal police personnel.  Bear in mind that this bill does nothing
> to create any new law enforcement department. It clarifies power of
> arrest and authority to carry firearms to existing law enforcement
> personnel.  I say "clarifies" because in reality all law enforcement
> personnel (and even ordinary citizens) have power of arrest for crimes
> they actually witness.  But without a gun on their side, wildlife
> officers who encounter law breakers on federal lands are just only
> powerless.  They can often be in mortal danger.
>
> We shouldn't believe that any new law is bad just because it comes from
> the "left side" of the aisle.  This one has support from both parties.
> I hope it passes.
>

20 years on military bases didn't give me much respect for "base cops".

There's a reason they don't let 'em carry guns off post or only gave
them limited authority over civilians.

I've been hoping that some of the more intrusive components of the
patriot act would have been abolished by Obama - but he has fallen short
there.

And the "his addendum" was tongue in cheek.