Continued attacks on Second Amendment live in the shadow of the DOJ’s genesis

Michael Reynolds/Pool via AP

The Department of Justice (DOJ) was formed in 1870, something parroted by Attorney General Merrick Garland in recent remarks, and was assembled to protect civil liberties. The quick history has to do with Reconstruction era America and the need for seeing prosecutions over the usurpation of peoples’ rights under the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments in stubborn areas of the Union. Garland, in his speech on a program called Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), in a sidebar touched on the Buffalo shooting and the need for protections today for the Black community.

But what I will say is that one of the Department’s first principal tasks upon its founding in 1870 was to secure the civil rights promised by the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, and to hold white supremacists accountable for the terrible violence perpetrated against Black Americans.

Almost 152 years later, our charge to disrupt, investigate, and prosecute hate-fueled attacks remains urgent.

Garland used the blood of innocents to tie the inception of the DOJ, its importance, and that heinous terroristic act together. The signing of An Act to Establish the Department of Justice was done by Republican President Ulysses S. Grant, and the United States of then is much different than the United States of now. In my opinion, better today than then, from what I understand about history. Garland, who seems to think he’s walking some sort of path of righteousness, discussed the community intervention program PSN. He outlined four pillars:

As part of the Justice Department’s comprehensive strategy to disrupt violent crime, we strengthened PSN. And we outlined four new strategies that now serve as the pillars of the program: Community Engagement; Prevention and Intervention; Focused and Strategic Enforcement; and Accountability.

You have no doubt heard a lot about these pillars over the last two days.

But I want to underscore that they all support the same goal: they help us ensure that every community — small and large, rural and urban — has the tools it needs to curb violent crime.

The Justice Department is committed to using every resource at its disposal to support our community and law enforcement partners in that effort.

That is why all of our Department law enforcement agencies, and our 94 United States Attorneys’ offices — all of which are represented at this summit — are working with their partners in state and local law enforcement to develop and implement district-specific, anti-violent crime policies.

Community violence intervention programs have been effective. Often cited by Cam, the 1990’s era Operation Ceasefire, caused a dramatic drop in violence in Boston when it was in effect. The crux of programs like these involve the carrot and stick method. If Garland and those he implores to adopt such initiatives don’t follow through by using the “Accountability” portion of their pillars, though, it’s all for naught. That is, we need to see prosecutions, and harsh penalties for the most violent offenders. Garland alludes to this slightly, but we won’t hold our breath on proper execution.

The Justice Department is committed to disrupting this disturbing increase in gun violence.

We have instructed our U.S. Attorneys’ offices to prioritize prosecutions of those who are responsible for the greatest gun violence. These include repeat offenders who are the major drivers of violent crime.

These also include those who illegally traffic in firearms, and those who act as straw purchasers.

Each U.S. Attorney’s Office and each ATF Field Division is designating coordinators to work with our law enforcement partners to tackle the threat of ghost guns.

It was impossible for Garland to not tap into the en vogue so-called “ghost guns” during his remarks. While indeed, having the DOJ focus on repeat offenders and those most responsible for the greatest gun violence. Why even bring up all the rest? Sure, staving off the supply of illicitly procured firearms would mitigate their numbers on the streets, but that would not stop violence and or violent acts. Garland, purporting to be some sort of a beacon of freedom, cited recent statistics.

And while firearm homicide rates increased across all age groups — in both large and small cities, and in rural areas — Black male children, teenagers, and adults were disproportionately the victims of these crimes.

A Johns Hopkins report expands on the statistics more, filling in some of the gaps the flunky left out:

People of different races and ethnicities in the U.S. are impacted by gun violence differently. This is a result of social and economic factors that are associated with increased risk of violence. For example, gun homicides are highly concentrated within neighborhoods composed of predominantly Black and Hispanic/Latino residents. These neighborhoods face a host of systemic inequalities— hypersegregation, discrimination, lack of economic opportunities, and under-resourced public services. As a result, young Black and Hispanic/Latino people, particularly males, are disproportionately impacted by gun homicide. In contrast, elderly white men are at increased risk for gun suicide because this demographic is most likely to live in more rural communities with limited availability of mental health services and easy access to firearms.

What’s not explicitly stated within both the report (not that I’m gaga over this report by any stretch of the imagination) nor Garland’s remarks; due to those “highly concentrated neighborhoods composed of predominantly Black and Hispanic/Latino residents”, most of the homicides and violence committed would end up being Black on Black or Latino on Latino. More specifically, or fairly stated, within those neighborhoods and communities.

Garland and the Biden-Harris administration, along with MSM, are seeking to continue to polarize the nation on race. The attack in Buffalo was somewhat of an isolated event. Do race driven attacks occur? Yes. The news, administration, et.al. are all painting events like that one to be commonplace though. In my opinion, I feel race relations overall, have been doing quite well over the years, with only polarization being reignited by Obama and Holder, with that narrative being pushed further by MSM. I’m not so naive to say that there are no racists nor acts of race related violence. There are. I just don’t think the situation is as bad as we’re being fed.

Pulling a page out of history, let’s look at that Department of Justice and what they were up to from the time of its founding. Two years after the official formation of the DOJ, an April 19, 1872 letter addressed to the House of Representatives noted within Messages and Papers of the Presidents Ulysses S. Grant, Grant addressed some issues that his then Attorney General and others communicated to him:

EXECUTIVE MANSION , April 19 , 1872. To the House of Representatives :

Most, if not all, of this information, except what I derived from the Attorney – General, came to me orally, and was to the effect that said counties were under the sway of powerful combinations, properly known as “Kuklux Klans,” the objects of which were by force and terror to prevent all political action not in accord with the views of the members; to deprive colored citizens of the right to bear arms and of the right to a free ballot; to suppress schools in which colored children were taught, and to reduce the colored people to a condition closely akin to that of slavery; that these combinations were organized and armed, and had rendered the local laws ineffectual to protect the classes whom they desired to oppress; that they had perpetrated many murders and hundreds of crimes of minor degree, all of which were unpunished; and that witnesses could not safely testify against them unless the more active members were placed under restraint.

Issues at the time of the founding of the DOJ that were on the chief executive’s radar included the Black population having their right to keep and bear arms deprived. The violence that Garland discusses, he so acutely ties directly to firearms, while simultaneously painting a picture of an ugly America.

The problems we have in this country are real ones. None of this is to be dismissive towards the real plights that persons of color, minorities, or other potentially marginalized people may have to live through. Garland and the rest of the Biden-Harris troupe, like most left of center progressives today, are doing what they’ve done for decades. Continue to marginalize these communities by using them through their political grandstanding and for pushing an agenda. Need we be reminded that the Big Guy once said “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Garland, in his capacity as Attorney General, has really moved me to look further into the DOJ and its history. Another nugget I ran into that’s worth exploring this topic is from The Department of Justice; Its History and Functions:

The functions, the powers and duties of the Attorney General and of the Department of Justice cannot easily be summarized; nor can they thoroughly be understood without a knowledge of the history of their creation and development. But in addition to this history a brief description of the manner in which these functions are exercised through the several bureaus or divisions of the Department will materially assist to an understanding of them. With few exceptions these bureaus and divisions were not established by statute, nor suddenly marked out and organized by the Attorney – General; but gradually grew up and became segregated as the several officials were put in charge of certain classes of work; and are best known as the offices of these several officials.

We may not find it easy to fully realize and understand the role of the AG and the DOJ, but someone with an intelligence slightly above room temperature knows that what we have going on now, it ain’t working. That includes all the three letter agencies, but perhaps specifically the ATF.

Garland’s grandstanding and big talk about cracking down on violent crime, and of course so-called “ghost guns”, I’ll believe it when I see it. Garland is more inclined to go after the former than the latter. If the progressives want to really make this stuff work, they ought to respect all the civil liberties we’re afforded by our creator, including the Second Amendment. After that respect of all persons and liberties, take out the stick if the carrot’s not working. But don’t paint an insincere picture of our country, and continue to use minorities as a political vehicle, it’s bad taste.