Guns Over Troops: A Better Way to Fight Crime

In the fight against violent crime, some leaders think sending in troops is the answer. But is this really the best way to keep people safe? Let's think about this. First, consider the role of guns in these crimes. In many cities, guns are everywhere. They're too easy to get, especially for young people. This isn't just a local issue. It's a big problem that needs a big solution. Mayor Adams, who usually doesn't criticize the president, agrees. He says taking guns off the streets is more important than having troops patrol the neighborhoods. He's seen firsthand how guns fuel violence, especially among young people involved in gangs. But instead of focusing on gun control, some leaders want to send in the military. They think this will make cities safer. But is this really the answer? Crime rates have been going down in many cities. So why bring in the troops? Take Washington, D. C. , for example. The president sent in nearly 2, 300 National Guard troops. But crime was already down 26% from the previous year. And what have these troops accomplished? They've picked up trash and seized some guns. But without better gun laws, more guns will just replace the ones they've taken. Meanwhile, cities like New York and Chicago are saying no thanks to the troops. They're doing their own work to fight crime. And they're seeing results. So why bring in the military? Some people think this is about more than just crime. They see it as a political move. The cities targeted for troop deployment all have something in common: their mayors are people of color. Coincidence? Maybe. But it's something to think about. At the end of the day, the real solution is clear. We need to get guns off the streets. We need better laws to control who can buy them and how they're sold. Until we do that, no amount of troops will make our cities safer.