Recent deaths remind residents of the problems facing a community that fails to invest adequately in its police force. Recent budget cuts on federal and state levels have left the city with significantly fewer officers. The state needs to realize there is more to public safety than answering emergency calls.

People seem to think crime in the Cities is a Minneapolis-specific issue, while not taking into account the influx of people who come to the cities for employment or entertainment.

That both of the recent television-highlighted victims were not Twin Cities residents makes it clear that the state collectively has a stake in the investment of crime prevention, specifically in the Cities. Despite that many come to the Cities, using its resources and services, only Minneapolis residents are paying property taxes that go toward the maintenance and safety of the city.

While it’s true there is less federal funding, blame cannot be shifted from the state. Over the past few years, the number of officers in the Cities has declined significantly. Ultimately, it’s up to local government to support these needs.

We have great 911 responses, but there should be more emphasis placed on the need to reduce the opportunity for crimes. It’s obvious that emergencies cannot be ignored. It is more important to save a person in danger than patrol the streets to deter crime, but why must the city settle for limited security? Why can’t the state do all in its power to save and protect as many citizens as it can?

The current structure is shortsighted in that it does not recognize the need for prevention. This view proves to be dangerous because, in the long run, it ultimately will hurt citizens more. Investing in crime prevention would improve overall ability to save through directed patrolling, as well as having officers working with the community and educating them about issues. Instead of placing individuals in a position where they have to be saved, it’s better to do all we can and avoid the situation altogether.