The Proposal to Disarm the IRS
Rep. Barry Moore of Alabama has introduced the “Why Does the IRS Need Guns Act,” proposing to remove firearms and ammunition from IRS agents. The plan would:
- Prohibit the IRS from using funds to acquire firearms and ammunition
- Transfer existing weapons to the Administrator of General Services
- Auction them off to reduce the federal deficit
Moore, supported by GOP colleagues like Harriet Hageman, Mary Miller, and Clay Higgins, argues that the IRS has become “weaponized” against Americans. He believes the agency has inappropriately targeted various groups and individuals. “The only thing IRS agents should be armed with are calculators,” Moore stated, emphasizing his view on proper IRS equipment.
The proposal aims to create a leaner, firearms-free IRS while potentially generating revenue through the sale of existing weapons to licensed dealers and the public. This approach aligns with Moore’s perspective on limiting federal power and aligning government capabilities with public expectations.
Historical Context of Government Disarmament
The proposal to disarm the IRS presents an interesting juxtaposition with the Second Amendment rights typically championed by conservatives. This paradox has roots in the founding of our republic, where the Second Amendment was enshrined to maintain a balance of power between the government and its citizens.
The Founding Fathers, emerging from British rule, were skeptical of centralized power. They ensured the populace could defend itself if necessary, a sentiment echoed by those who emphasize limited government and individual rights today.
Moore’s concern about the IRS’s armament reflects a broader conservative view questioning the need for government agencies to possess firearms beyond essential public safety and defense roles. This perspective aligns with a strict interpretation of the Constitution, advocating for limited, transparent government directly answerable to the people.
The proposal invites deeper inquiry into whether civil administration agencies require armament, suggesting that certain government functions might be best executed without the potential for militarization. This stance continues a constitutional dialogue that has persisted since our republic’s inception, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a vigilant populace as an essential pillar of liberty.
The Role of the IRS and Public Safety
The Internal Revenue Service’s primary function is to administer the tax code and collect revenue for public expenditures. This role places it firmly within civil administration, distinct from conventional law enforcement agencies focused on public safety.
Rep. Moore’s proposal stems from the belief that IRS agents should focus on accounting and taxation rather than being equipped for combat. This stance emphasizes a distinction between the IRS and other law enforcement bodies, questioning whether firearms are essential for IRS operations.
Typically, IRS activities involve:
- Assessing tax returns
- Auditing financial statements
- Pursuing tax compliance
These tasks require financial and legal expertise rather than an armed presence. The notion of armed IRS agents raises concerns about the agency potentially overstepping its necessary scope.
In scenarios requiring enforcement and public safety measures, law enforcement agencies like the FBI or local police are equipped to perform joint operations with the IRS. This allows the IRS to focus on its primary civilian tasks while deferring situations needing armed intervention to appropriate entities.
By advocating for the disarmament of the IRS, Moore aims to ensure the agency remains focused on its fiscal duties, aligning with the Founders’ preference for a government that preserves citizens’ sovereign rights by compartmentalizing powers and roles.
Implications for Second Amendment Interpretation
The proposal to disarm the IRS has significant implications for interpreting the Second Amendment. Fundamentally, the Second Amendment affirms “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,” crafted by the Founding Fathers as a safeguard against governmental overreach.
For conservatives viewing the Constitution through the lens of ‘Original Intent,’ this proposal exemplifies the Founders’ wisdom. They envisioned a republic with limited federal power, checked by civic liberty, notably through an armed populace. By potentially disarming the IRS, Moore and his colleagues advocate for containing governmental capability to coerce or intimidate its citizenry.
This approach aligns with an understanding that the federal apparatus should not amass weapons that could be misused against its own people, adhering to 18th-century originalism principles where the government’s role was primarily to serve, rather than overpower, its citizens.
The debate between the Second Amendment as a ‘Living Document’ versus ‘Original Intent’ raises questions about adapting historical protections to modern realities. However, from a conservative perspective, disarming the IRS aligns with reducing federal expansion into domains not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution.
Ultimately, this discourse situates within broader considerations of how the Second Amendment is interpreted and applied today. It underscores a foundational desire for balance—the tenet of a constitutional republic where empowerment and oversight coexist.
In the ongoing conversation about the balance of power within our constitutional republic, the proposal to disarm the IRS stands as a significant point of reflection. This initiative aims to align government capabilities with public expectations, ensuring federal agencies operate within their intended roles. By focusing on this alignment, we honor the vision of our Founding Fathers and reinforce the principles that support our nation’s governance.
- Siegel RB. Dead or Alive: Originalism as Popular Constitutionalism in Heller. Harvard Law Review. 2008;122(1):191-245.
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
- United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876).
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. ___ (2022).