In light of the recent tragic school shooting in Georgia and Vice President Kamala Harris’s swift reaction to the call for action against gun violence, there is growing criticism over her silence regarding violent acts committed by armed Venezuelan migrant gangs in U.S. cities. The disparity in addressing these two forms of violence raises significant questions about political priorities and the protection of American citizens.
While no one disputes the tragedy of school shootings, which have become a grim recurrence in American society, it’s notable how specific violent incidents—such as the takeover of apartment buildings by Venezuelan gangs—seem to be sidelined. Harris’s vocal stance on gun control, as in the case of the Apalachee High School shooting, aligns with a broader Democratic agenda. However, when it comes to illegal immigrant violence, particularly involving gangs like Tren de Aragua in Aurora, Colorado, her administration’s silence speaks volumes.
Critics, such as Russell Stuart, a Beverly Hills school board candidate, highlight the selective nature of Harris’s outrage. The VP is quick to politicize gun violence when it involves a troubled American teen but remains conspicuously quiet when foreign gangs terrorize law-abiding citizens. This selective focus not only frustrates conservatives but raises a broader question: why does the administration prioritize addressing gun violence over the equally urgent issue of criminal violence by migrant gangs?
One possible reason for Harris’s silence is that acknowledging this issue would mean confronting the consequences of lax border policies. For four years, the Biden-Harris administration has overseen an influx of migrants. As Rep. Carlos Gimenez points out, Harris has been part of the leadership responsible for the weakened border security that has contributed to such problems. Acknowledging the presence of violent gangs like Tren de Aragua would mean admitting that sanctuary state policies, which protect illegal immigrants, are endangering Americans.
Furthermore, addressing the migrant gang crisis would complicate Harris’s narrative of compassion and openness toward immigrants. Venezuelan migrants, in particular, cannot currently be deported due to diplomatic issues with the Maduro regime, leaving American communities vulnerable to the rise of organized crime within these populations. Rather than focus on the complex, politically sensitive issue of migrant violence, Harris seems to take the easier path of addressing gun control, a more familiar talking point for her base.
This selective action creates a double standard in which certain types of violence are addressed based on political convenience. This is not to say that gun violence is unimportant—it is a profoundly troubling issue—but when the VP fails to acknowledge violence carried out by foreign criminals overtaking American communities, it creates the appearance of political manipulation. It suggests that gun violence is used as a tool to promote a political agenda, while the violence and suffering caused by migrant gangs is ignored, perhaps because it does not fit that same agenda.
Law-abiding citizens deserve better. They deserve an administration that takes all forms of violence seriously, not one that selectively chooses when to act based on what is politically expedient. The problem is apparent: Vice President Harris needs to address all violence, including the alarming rise of migrant gang activity, rather than use gun violence as a convenient political platform. Until then, the safety of Americans will continue to be compromised by both foreign and domestic threats.