Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I know the family. There is nothing online about the husband’s professional career, because he has a high profile security job with the federal government.
Christine was the nicest and most generous person I have ever met, and I am deeply sad and shocked with this tragedy.
Is that why he had a gun in the house?
yes, he would have a gun as part of his job
He worked for the IRS. A bean counter with a gun?
An IRS Special Agent does carry a gun.
https://www.jobs.irs.gov/resources/job-descriptions/irs-criminal-investigation-special-agent
Still struggling to understand what type of tax enforcement requires a gun
This is perhaps the easiest part of the entire case to understand. IRS agents conduct raids on people who don't pay their taxes and are ordered to seize assets (houses, cars, jewelry, cash, etc.). You don't think that perhaps there is an element of danger to that job? You think there is 100% peaceful compliance when criminals get their assets siezed?
Okay, wow. Calm down there. It was a simple comment. I'm well aware of efforts to seize assets, etc., for those not paying their taxes. I didn't know that was actually done by someone employed by IRS; I thought it might done by another federal LE arm, like the FBI. I've never evaded tax payments so I simply didn't know and honestly, with what seems like a lax approach to crime enforcement nowadays, it struck me as odd that we would arm IRS agents. I mean, I don't expect 100% peaceful compliance with ANY type of criminal but it also strikes me that there are many ways to seize assets beyond a knock at the door by an armed official. Are we suddenly championing armed officials for non-violent crimes?