Crime is bad. Violent crime is worse. That’s obvious. It’s not a partisan point. Most Democrats — I happen to be one of them — don’t cheer lawlessness. In fact, 68% of us say crime is a major problem in big cities. A few progressives have attacked police, but they sit far outside the mainstream. Most Democratic voters hold a higher opinion of law enforcement than of traditional liberal pillars like organized labor or public schools.So if everyone agrees crime is bad, the real argument isn’t over morality — it’s over solutions.We all agree crime is bad. The question is whether we fight it with empty theatrics or serious, sustained policing.That’s where President Trump’s anti-crime efforts collapse. Talking tough doesn’t make streets safer. His approach wastes money, strains resources, and distracts from the hard work of policing.The problem with militarizing citiesTrump’s main crime-fighting move has been deploying the National Guard to large cities like Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles. Chicago, Portland, and San Francisco are also on the president’s list. The images look dramatic, but they don’t reduce crime.The Posse Comitatus Act bars the president from using the military as a domestic police force, which makes it unclear whether Guardsmen can legally arrest suspects or patrol neighborhoods. Most Guardsmen don’t want to cross that line — and they aren’t trained to. In Washington, the Guard’s own report lists its activities: clearing trash, spreading mulch, and painting fences. Good work, yes — but not policing.These deployments also carry a hefty price tag. The Los Angeles mission, involving 4,000 guardsmen and 700 Marines for less than two months, cost about $118 million. Washington’s ongoing deployment could exceed that. Long-term operations in cities like Memphis, Portland, and Chicago would drive the bills even higher.And those aren’t the only costs. The Guard is already stretched thin. Disaster relief missions during brutal wildfire and hurricane seasons have drained manpower and equipment. Overseas deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan reduced recruitment and retention. If the president keeps sending Guardsmen into American cities, they may not be ready when the country faces a real disaster — or, heaven forbid, a war.Ignoring what worksInstead of chasing headlines, Trump could invest in what actually reduces crime. His One Big Beautiful Bill Act offered funding only for local agencies that cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. It provided nothing to hire or retain more police or prosecutors — the people who actually solve crimes and clear backlogged cases.The solution is straightforward: Redirect the hundreds of millions spent on National Guard deployments into state and local law enforcement. Departments nationwide face critical shortages. Chicago alone needs about 1,300 more officers.RELATED: The city that chose crime and chaos over courage Stock Depot via iStock/Getty ImagesHistory proves this works. Between the late 1960s and early 1990s, violent crime surged 371%. By 1991, the U.S. murder rate hit a historic peak. Then came the bipartisan 1994 Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act. The law funded new prisons, domestic violence prevention programs, and — most importantly — about 84,000 additional police officers.The result? Crime fell sharply. Violent crime has dropped roughly 50% since then. The law had flaws — cutting inmate access to higher education was one — but safer streets remain its chief legacy.The way to fight crimeIf President Trump truly wants to make America safer, he should stop staging photo ops and start funding proven methods. Deploying the National Guard is costly, risky, and legally questionable. Hiring cops, prosecutors, and judges works — and has worked for decades.We all agree crime is bad. The question is whether we fight it with empty theatrics or serious, sustained policing. The answer should be as clear as the problem itself.

President Donald Trump has announced initiatives to expand access to in vitro fertilization and reduce associated costs — as each round of IVF can cost $12,000 to $25,000 — and one round is often not all it takes.“In the Trump administration, we want to make it easier for all couples to have babies, raise children,” Trump said at the White House on October 16.“That’s why today I’m pleased to announce that after extensive negotiations, EMD Serrano, the largest fertility drug manufacturer in the world, has agreed to provide massive discounts to all fertility drugs they sell in the United States, including the most popular drug of all, the IVF drug,” he continued.While many Republicans have cheered Trump’s announcement, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is not on the same page.“Trump says that, you know, he’s unaware of conservative religious objections to IVF, but IVF is inherently pro-life. And I’ll just say it doesn’t surprise me at all that Trump has this position. IVF is extremely popular, even among Republicans, and he represents the position that a lot of people have,” Stuckey says.“But let me just explain something,” she continues. “The pro-life position is not just ‘more babies.’ We want more babies that are conceived in loving marriages between a man and a woman. Being pro-life doesn’t mean that we are pro every form of conception. Obviously, we can agree, right, that not every form of conception is moral and ethical.”“There is a cost to IVF. In fact, most babies, most embryos that are made via IVF, the vast majority of those embryos will never be transferred and will never make it to a live birth. In fact, the IVF industry kills more babies every year than the abortion industry does,” she explains.“If we really believe in our pro-life ethics, that a life is a life no matter how small, that human life starts at conception, then how we treat those embryos that are created in a lab that are frozen indefinitely, that are very often eugenically discarded because they’re the wrong gender or they have Down syndrome or they have some other kind of disability or they were just that unlucky extra guy that was created and their parents don’t want them anymore,” she says.“All of that really matters. It’s not only about not killing a baby inside the womb. It’s about not discarding and mistreating life that has been created,” she adds.Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

The former singer of the Welsh rock band Lostprophets, Ian Watkins, recently was attacked and killed in prison, according to authorities. Watkins was serving a sentence for multiple pedophilia-related offenses, including attempting to rape a baby.Police in England said Watkins was murdered at His Majesty's Prison Wakefield in Great Britain on the morning of Oct. 11.'Extensive inquiries remain ongoing in relation to the murder of Ian Watkins, and these arrests form part of that.'Watkins, 48, was pronounced dead at HMP Wakefield despite being given medical treatment for injuries suffered during a "serious assault."Last week, British authorities announced the arrest of two men — 25-year-old Rashid Gedel and 43-year-old Samuel Dodsworth. Both suspects were charged with murder in connection with Watkins' death. The West Yorkshire Police Department said in a statement Tuesday that two other men — ages 23 and 39 — also were arrested in connection with Watkins' death and charged with suspicion of conspiracy to murder. Police did not name the two new suspects. The senior investigating officer in the alleged murder said the investigation is ongoing. Detective Chief Inspector James Entwistle of the Homicide and Major Enquiry Team with the West Yorkshire Police Department stated, "Extensive inquiries remain ongoing in relation to the murder of Ian Watkins, and these arrests form part of that.""Ian Watkins' family are being updated as the investigation progresses," Entwistle said. "However, we do not anticipate any immediate developments at this stage."A spokesperson for the His Majesty's Prison Service told the BBC that it was aware of an incident at the prison but was "unable to comment further while the police investigate."The West Yorkshire Police Department and HMP Wakefield did not immediately respond to Blaze News' request for comment.RELATED: Pair of convicted pedophiles — one who raped, murdered 3-year-old girl — die on same night in same prison Photo by Marc Grimwade/WireImageThe Mirror noted that HMP Wakefield is known as "Monster Mansion," which "houses some of the U.K.'s most infamous and dangerous criminals, ranging from serial killers to terrorists and habitual rapists."Watkins appeared in court in 2019 after a mobile phone reportedly was discovered in his prison cell. Watkins told magistrates that he was imprisoned among "murderers, mass murderers, rapists, pedophiles, serial killers — the worst of the worst," according to the Guardian.Previously, Watkins was stabbed in prison while serving time for his child sex crimes.As Blaze News reported in August 2023, Watkins was held hostage by three fellow HMP Wakefield prisoners for several hours and stabbed.The Mirror previously reported, "The prison had to wait until a 'Tornado Crew' could be assembled — specialist officers trained in hostage situations. The three prisoners kept Watkins hostage for almost six hours — it is believed the attack took place on B wing, where 70 percent of the prisoners are serving life and 20 percent serving 10 years or more. So serious were his injuries, it is understood that he received emergency treatment from paramedics in an ambulance on the prison estate."Watkins was arrested in December 2012 and hit with several child sex crime charges. "During trial, it was revealed that the password to encrypted files on Watkins' computer was 'I F*K KIDZ,'" Rolling Stone previously reported.In December 2013, Watkins pleaded guilty to 13 charges, including conspiring to rape a child, three counts of sexual assault of children, seven counts involving making or possessing indecent images of children, and one count of possessing an extreme pornographic image involving a sex act on an animal.The judge during the sentencing hearing described Watkins' crimes as "plumbing new depths of depravity," according to the Guardian.The disgraced singer was sentenced to 29 years in prison. Watkins' former band, Lostprophets, was founded in 1997 and topped the U.K. charts in 2006 after the release of its third album, "Liberation Transmission." Lostprophets broke up in 2013 when Watkins was sentenced to prison.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Thomas Koch, the mayor of Quincy, Massachusetts, commissioned two 10-foot-tall bronze statues to complement his city's new public safety headquarters, a 122,000 square-foot facility that will ultimately house both the police department and the fire department's administration offices.One of the statues that the city asked renowned sculptor Sergey Eylanbekov to design depicts the winged archangel Michael stepping on the head of a demon. The other statue depicts Florian, a third-century firefighting Roman soldier, dumping water on a burning building.'The statues of Michael and Florian honor service — not a creed.'Despite the broader cultural significance of both figures and their longstanding association with first responders, groups loath to see any public signs of Christianity joined a number of local residents in suing to block the installation of the statues.While the Norfolk Superior Court granted a preliminary injunction last week blocking the installation of the two statues, the city of Quincy, evidently unwilling to surrender to iconoclastic secularists, has teamed up with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty to file an appeal."We respect every citizen's beliefs, religious or not. But the statues of Michael and Florian honor service — not a creed," Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch said in a statement to Blaze News. "We’re hopeful that the court will reverse this order and allow our city to pay tribute to the men and women who keep our city safe."The lawsuitThe lawsuit filed in May by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, the Freedom from Religion Foundation, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, names a number of Quincy residents as plaintiffs includinga Unitarian social justice warrior; a self-identified Catholic who finds the "violent imagery" of good triumphing over evil to be "offensive"; a local synagogue member who suggested the images "may exacerbate the current rise in anti-Semitism"; an Episcopalian who believes that walking past such statues would amount to "submission to religious symbols";several Catholics turned atheists apparently keen to avoid some of the imagery they grew up with; anda lapsed Catholic who suggested the image of Michael stepping on the head of a demon was "reminiscent of how George Floyd was killed."The lawsuit states that "affixing religious icons of one particular faith to a government facility — the City's public safety building, no less — sends an alarming message that those who do not subscribe to the City's preferred religious beliefs are second-class residents who should not feel safe, welcomed, or equally respected by their government."RELATED: Exposing the great lie about 'MAGA Christianity' — and the truth elites hate Quincy City Hall. Photo by Lane Turner/The Boston Globe via Getty Images.The complaint hammers home the significance of Michael in Catholicism, where he is recognized as the patron saint of police, yet neglects to note that Michael also features prominently in Christian, Jewish, and Islamic religious texts and traditions as well as in the Western literary canon and pop culture.While the suit hints at possible civic or professional accomplishments on the part of Florian that could be recognized with a statue, it again suggested that as the patron saint of firefighters, a statue of the historical figure would similarly "send a predominantly religious message."The plaintiffs alleged in their lawsuit that the city violated Article III of the Massachusetts Declaration Rights, and suggested that the installation of the statues "will not serve a predominantly secular purpose," but rather to "promote, promulgate, and advance one faith, subordinating other faiths as well as non-religious traditions."The allegation of a violation of state law as opposed to a violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution appears to have been strategic. After all, the U.S. Supreme Court has made expressly clear that "simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the establishment clause."Mayor Koch rejected the plaintiffs' thesis, underscoring in a sworn affidavit that he regarded it as "appropriate to erect statues of two internationally recognized symbols of police and fire service, an act which would also serve to inspire the men and women who work in the building.""There was nothing religious about this decision," continued Koch. "The fact that Michael and Florian each happen to be saints venerated in the Catholic Church is ancillary to their significance in the Police and Fire services, respectively."The injunctionQuincy suggested in the suit that the plaintiffs lacked standing because they were "simply offended by the planned statues, and, unwilling to confine themselves to the ordinary means for airing ideological disagreements with the government — the political process — have sought to make a lawsuit out of it."Norfolk Superior Court Justice William Sullivan, who was put on the court by former Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick, was evidently not persuaded.On Oct.14, Sullivan denied the city's motion to dismiss the lawsuit and granted a preliminary injunction against the erection of the statues, noting that the plaintiffs had demonstrated "that they are likely to succeed at proving that the permanent display of the oversized overtly religious-looking statutes have a primary effect of advancing religion."RELATED: Clinton labor secretary panics after Trump asks the archangel Michael for help fighting evil Photo by: Claudio Ciabochi/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images Speaking to Koch's suggestion that the statues have secular significance and purpose, Sullivan wrote, "To the extent a statue of Saint Michael provides inspiration or conveys a message of truth, justice, or the triumph of good over evil, it does so in his context as a biblical figure — namely, the archangel of God. It is impossible to strip the statue of its religious meaning to contrive a secular purpose."Rachel Davidson, a staff attorney at the ACLU of Massachusetts, celebrated the ruling, stating, "We are grateful to the court for acknowledging the immediate harm that the installation of these statues would cause and for ensuring that Quincy residents can continue to make their case for the proper separation of church and state.""Massachusetts citizens are free to practice their personal religious views by placing statues of saints or other religious iconography on private property," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. "But such religious iconography emphatically does not belong on government buildings where all must feel welcome."The appealBecket, a firm focused on protecting religious liberty, announced on Tuesday that it will join the city of Quincy in appealing Sullivan's decision."If allowed to stand, the decision would push cities across the Commonwealth to strip historic symbols from civic life whenever they carry religious associations," the firm said in a statement. "But the Supreme Court has upheld the use of symbols with religious roots in public life, including a World War I memorial featuring a cross, when they carry historical, cultural, or commemorative significance."Using private funding in the 1920s, the American Legion constructed the 40-foot-tall Peace Cross in Bladensburg, Maryland, to honor soldiers who perished in World War I. The sight of the cross evidently enraged iconoclastic secularists, who sought to have it toppled. While the Fourth Circuit proved more than happy to oblige them, the U.S. Supreme Court determined in its 2019 American Legion v. American Humanist Association ruling that the cross did not violate the Establishment Clause.The court also rejected the relevance of the test articulated by SCOTUS in its 1971 Lemon v. Kurtzman ruling as a way of guiding the court in identifying Establishment Clause violations, noting that the Lemon test presented "particularly daunting problems" in such cases that "involve the use, for ceremonial, celebratory, or commemorative purpose, of words or symbols with religious associations."While the Supreme Court has effectively rejected the Lemon test, Justice Sullivan leaned heavily on it in the Quincy case."Everyone is free to have their own opinions about public art, but in America, the fact that something may have religious associations is not a legitimate reason to censor it," said Joseph Davis, senior counsel at Becket."Our nation, like many others, has long drawn on historic symbols — including those with religious roots — to honor courage and sacrifice. The court should reject this lawsuit’s attempt to block these symbols of bravery and courage," added Davis.Quincy Police Chief Mark Kennedy's office indicated the police department will have no comment as the issue remains in the hands of the court.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Scott Jennings Tells Lying Ana Navarro and CNN NewsNight Panel the Real Reason They Oppose ICE

Neera Tanden Genuinely Thinks Images of Trump's WH East Wing Renovation Will Swing Va. Races for the Dems

Feel the Bern's Staggering Hypocrisy Over Lavish Spending for 'Oligarchy' Tour

Defense of Chicago Teacher’s Vile Kirk Murder Remarks Shows Schools Are Still Deeply Failing Kids

The October Surprise Jay Jones Didn't See Coming: Special Prosecutor Now Probing Reckless Driving Deal

NC General Assembly Acts Swiftly and Approves New Congressional Map - Here's What's Next