Are ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents authorized different weapons than ERO agents?

1. One agency, two missions — and overlapping weapons rules

ICE is organized into two main operational components: HSI (investigations) and ERO (enforcement and removals), and both divisions operate with law‑enforcement authorities and agency firearms policies. The ICE Firearms and Use of Force handbook explicitly lists “Authorized Officers” to include ERO Deportation Officers and HSI Special Agents and states that Authorized Officers are permitted to carry intermediate force weapons, indicating a single ICE-level policy that covers personnel from both components ^[1]. ICE’s broader public materials likewise tie weapons, qualification, and inspection requirements to agency firearms units and mandatory qualification cycles for agents and officers ^[4].

2. Component‑specific approvals and lists exist — HSI has its own approved list

While ICE-wide directives apply, ICE also maintains component-specific authorization documents. A dated ICE PDF titled “Authorized Firearms for Homeland Security Investigations” indicates HSI maintains an approved/purchase program naming specific shoulder‑fired firearms that HSI armed personnel are authorized to use, implying HSI can publish component‑specific authorized firearm lists within the larger ICE framework ^[2]. That suggests operational differences can be implemented through approved lists even while overarching policy is shared ^[1].

3. Reported differences in weapons in practice: examples for ERO

Career and recruitment resources report that ERO personnel may use a range of weapons systems in practice, with specific examples including the Colt M4 carbine, Remington Model 870 (shotgun), and Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun ^[3]. Those reports reflect equipment commonly associated with apprehension, transport, or tactical operations for ERO duties, and they align with the idea that ERO operational needs (apprehending, transporting, and removing noncitizens) can drive selection of particular platforms ^[3].

4. Training, qualification, and inspections are centralized expectations

ICE policy snippets emphasize that weapons must be inspected and approved by the agency firearms unit, and agents/officers must qualify with their weapons on a recurring schedule (the Wikipedia excerpt notes quarterly qualification and agency inspections). The Firearms and Use of Force handbook places both HSI and ERO under the same committee oversight for firearms and use‑of‑force reviews, indicating centralized oversight even if component lists differ ^{[4] [1]}.

5. What the present sources do not say (important limits)

Available sources do not provide a side‑by‑side, definitive catalog comparing every HSI‑authorized weapon to every ERO‑authorized weapon, nor do they provide current procurement spreadsheets or the most recent approved‑personal firearms lists for each component (not found in current reporting). The sources also do not state whether any weapon is strictly exclusive to one component in all circumstances; rather, they show that ICE has shared policies and component‑level lists that can create practical differences ^{[1] [2]}.

6. How competing perspectives would frame the question

One perspective—grounded in ICE policy documents—would emphasize unity: ICE sets common qualification, inspection, and intermediate‑force rules that apply to “Authorized Officers” across HSI and ERO ^[1]. Another perspective—based on component guidance and career reporting—would highlight operational divergence: HSI publishes an HSI‑specific approved firearms list and ERO career materials cite particular tactical platforms used by ERO personnel, which can create different field arsenals depending on mission needs ^{[2] [3]}.

7. Practical takeaway for readers asking “Are they authorized different weapons?”

Yes, both are authorized to carry intermediate force and agency‑approved firearms under ICE policy, but ICE permits component‑level approved lists and programs (HSI’s authorized firearms list is one explicit example), and career reporting shows ERO uses specific tactical weapon systems—so, in practice, the two components can and do have different authorized or commonly issued weapons depending on mission and approved purchase lists ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Available reporting does not provide an exhaustive, up‑to‑date comparison that proves absolute exclusivity of any particular weapon to one component (not found in current reporting).