National DOJ sends gun legislation package to White House as debate rages over mass shootings

[CountryGent]

More BS on the way: DOJ sends gun legislation package to White House as debate rages over mass shootings

Read More

 

[JustSomeGuy]

Something about telling them to STFU and stay in their lane comes to mind...

 

[arakboss]

It seems regardless of what party is in office the DOJ is always ready to go after our rights.

 

[The Heretic]

 

[Camelfilter]

Wouldn't a department whose sole responsibility is justice, recognize the import of the documents with which our nation was founded upon?

Then simply recommend not infringing upon said.

It's really not difficult.

There mission is: to enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law.

Since when does the attorney general (head of DOJ) write and recommend legislation? Seems a GROSS conflict of interest.

 

[The Heretic]

Wouldn't a department whose sole responsibility is justice, recognize the import of the documents with which our nation was founded upon?

Then simply recommend not infringing upon said.

It's really not difficult.

There mission is: to enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law.

Since when does the attorney general (head of DOJ) write and recommend legislation? Seems a GROSS conflict of interest.

Bureaucrats are bureaucrats. Like anybody else whose job depends on doing what they are told, they do what they are told - even more so because their bosses are politicians or involved in politics.

If I don't like what my boss tells me to do, if I think it goes against my personal beliefs, I can go find a job writing software for someone else. If I were a bureaucrat/et. al. with my career very tightly coupled to government agencies/etc., then I would probably find it a LOT harder to find a different job with a different agency or for a commercial outfit that depended on government contracts.

 

[Mark W.]

The DOJ does not write law nor can anything sent from them to the president become law without first passing both houses of congress and a final compromise bill then being sent to the president to be signed or vetoed

 

[CamoDeafie]

The Judicial Branch, SCOTUS in specific is only chartered to tell the Executive and Legislative Branches if the laws proposed passes Constitutional muster, or as is understood currently, to merely "interpret" the laws passed.

In a strict Constitutional reading of the founding documents, it would seem that currently all three branches of the Federal Government have overreached their authorities and neglected duties.

 

[arakboss]

The DOJ does not write law nor can anything sent from them to the president become law without first passing both houses of congress and a final compromise bill then being sent to the president to be signed or vetoed

Technically that is correct, unfortunately the DOJ can work around this as we witnessed with the bump stock ban.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Why is the DOJ engaging in opinion politics?

 

[bbbass]

Since when does the attorney general (head of DOJ) write and recommend legislation? Seems a GROSS conflict of interest.

Why is the DOJ engaging in opinion politics?

Depends... I'd be curious to know if past DOJ participated in crafting or making recommendations for anti-crime bills.

 

[The Heretic]

The Judicial Branch, SCOTUS in specific is only chartered to tell the Executive and Legislative Branches if the laws proposed passes Constitutional muster, or as is understood currently, to merely "interpret" the laws passed.

In a strict Constitutional reading of the founding documents, it would seem that currently all three branches of the Federal Government have overreached their authorities and neglected duties.

The judicial branch has certainly neglected to study history and law - specifically the basis of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. Which is hard to understand as most, if not all, probably had to go thru 6 years of law school. You would think that they would teach the basics there. I wouldn't know as I have not been thru that, but I have read enough history, especially on the Second Amendment, to understand that most judges are either ignoring history or were brain washed in law school.

 

[The Heretic]

Depends... I'd be curious to know if past DOJ participated in crafting or making recommendations for anti-crime bills.

From what I understand, they were instrumental in crafting the NFA

 

[The Heretic]

Why is the DOJ engaging in opinion politics?

They do what they are told to do

 

[awshoot]

The judicial branch has certainly neglected to study history and law - specifically the basis of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. Which is hard to understand as most, if not all, probably had to go thru 6 years of law school. You would think that they would teach the basics there. I wouldn't know as I have not been thru that, but I have read enough history, especially on the Second Amendment, to understand that most judges are either ignoring history or were brain washed in law school.

Post WWII we have been experiencing a sort of soft Executive branch coup. You can see this in that the last time a war was declared, was back in 1941. Under the Constitution, it is Congress' job to declare war but because war is generally unpopular and hard to get reelected on, especially when the danger at home seems remote or non-existent, legislators were happy to pass that burden on to the Executive branch. It got so bad that in the early 70s, Congress had to pass a law regulating iteself regarding the topic (though the Constitution should be enough) -- The War Powers Act which at least required Congressional approval after a set period of time if the President started a war. One of the lingering legacies of the Obama admin is that the war in Libya never got Congressional approval -- the Executive just defined it as not war. That's a shockingly illiberal precedent to set and an enormous power grab.

Anyway, Congress is happy to give power over unpopular subjects to the Executive because then they don't have to answer hard questions back home -- in fact, they can point fingers and say its all about the president and get some popular soundbites. And the Executive is happy to take that power, warts and all, because it is POWER. It's all just a game and the way it is being played, we will see the Presidency become an ever more powerful part of government when really, it should just be one third of tripartate form. For people who aren't keen to live under authoritarian rule, this is concerning.

 

[Goosebrown]

DOJ has long standing ability to propose legislation but not to make legislation. They can, under presidential orders, proposed anything they like and it is part of their portfolio. If they make a recommendation to the president, he can pass that to congress and if they wish, they can take action on it.

Everyone here is being a little too precious regarding this. Pretty much anyone can propose anything, but the power to create law remains in congress.

 

[Goosebrown]

Depends... I'd be curious to know if past DOJ participated in crafting or making recommendations for anti-crime bills.

Yes it absolutely has done in the past.

 

[Member 52301]

I do not have the links in front of me now but there have been several DOJ and FBI people talking about GUN issues over and over again on the WWWeb, OTA boob tube and radio news in various interviews.

Former-retired and present .gov officials have given their opinions and it seems to be more frequent within the last month or so.

Cate

 

[bbbass]

Yes it absolutely has done in the past.

I think so too. I specifically had in mind the Joe Biden Crime Bill long before he was VP. Or the one that had O'bummer putting many thousands of cops on the streets. (supposedly)

 

[billdeserthills]

One thing that could have stopped the last shooter is if the FBI/NICS had a way to let the police know to pick up criminals who attempt to illegally purchase a gun--of course that would blow their whole agenda cause it would stop many gun attacks