"Larry" <x@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:x-CFCB78.11231803052008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <7cTSj.2867$_.1050@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Magus <nope@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> Deadrat wrote:
>> > Magus <nope@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> > news:aYPSj.68898$Q52.4211@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> There *are* departments of the federal police, they just aren't named
>> "police departments".
>
> Once again a resort to a dictionary definition as authority. Why does
> everyone do this?
>
> There is no federal police department. There is no general federal
> police power. There are, of course, federal law enforcement agencies
> that enforce the laws that are within the jurisdiction of the federal
> government to enact, but a police department that does not make.
>
> Get it?
Ok, so there are Federal Law Enforcement Agencies but no police?
There were no police (in the modern concept) in America at the time of the
Constitution either.
Pretty much useless factoids.
Police, Sherriff, Constable, Marshall, FBI, or other LEO -- A rose by
any other name would smell as sweet.
|
