You think they would have turned him loose to complete their 'investigation' if he'd been a CWP holder with proper credentials?
Also, how much you want to bet this law doesn't actually apply to him because he's not actually an undercover agent? (or maybe they're running a sting/instigation of crime operation in Mnpls now)
"The agent’s name was not released per Minnesota Statute 13.82, which allows the identity of an undercover law enforcement officer to be kept private."
"The agent’s name was not released per Minnesota Statute 13.82, which allows the identity of an undercover law enforcement officer to be kept private."
Uh, if he brandished that weapon without displaying his badge and ID as a Federal Agent, does he not waive that privacy?
7 comments:
What's the betting that orders have been issued to: 'go out there and brandish' to get adverse publicity for gun owners?
Or is it just another one of the 'Only Ones' shooting themselves in the foot ... again!
III
You think they would have turned him loose to complete their 'investigation' if he'd been a CWP holder with proper credentials?
Also, how much you want to bet this law doesn't actually apply to him because he's not actually an undercover agent? (or maybe they're running a sting/instigation of crime operation in Mnpls now)
"The agent’s name was not released per Minnesota Statute 13.82, which allows the identity of an undercover law enforcement officer to be kept private."
And the coverup begins. Note that the paper has no comments section. Party to the coverup.
The only ones taking care of one of their own. Wouldn't have made the paper, if not for the traffic back up. No charges will be filed.
"The agent’s name was not released per Minnesota Statute 13.82, which allows the identity of an undercover law enforcement officer to be kept private."
Uh, if he brandished that weapon without displaying his badge and ID as a Federal Agent, does he not waive that privacy?
Laws are for the peons, not for the ruling class and their minions.
MKost likely yet another case of "law for thee but none for me " attitude of feds these days. >Jeff
Post a Comment