An Honest Conversation About Public Safety
As an organization staffed primarily by former public defenders, we care deeply about crime prevention. In that work, we encountered people who caused harm and experienced harm. More often than not, our clients were both. We’ve therefore witnessed this tragic cycle countless times, and it is frustrating to see policymakers take so little action to prevent it.
This newsletter is about the dangerous weaponization of crime, which prevents us from both taking a hard look at why crime happens and developing serious solutions to prevent it. It should not have to be said, but we will say it nonetheless: every murder is abhorrent, and maintaining public safety is the foundational duty of the government. And yet for decades, politicians have pointed fingers and made stump speeches when terrible tragedies occur. Now, that tactic is metastasizing, with politicians falsely blaming groups fighting against hate and for evidence-based approaches to preventing violence, by scapegoating them for high-profile tragedies.
Notably absent is a serious conversation about crime prevention.
Below, we contrast what a real conversation about safety might have looked like in a few high-profile tragedies with what actually did happen. This analysis provides a sad insight into why things never seem to change. We also provide some guidance on what programs have worked – and what has been lost – with this Administration’s attack on safety.
Charlotte: How We Fail to Take Crime Prevention Seriously.
- We start with the terrible tragedy that occurred in Charlotte because it exemplifies how quickly politicians harness a tragedy to score points. Charlotte is, however, simply a stand-in for what happens whenever there is a high-profile violent crime.
- On August 22, Decarlos Brown, Jr. murdered Iryna Zarutska on a light rail train in Charlotte, North Carolina. At the time of the incident, Mr. Brown had a pending misdemeanor charge for misuse of the 911 service that occurred during an apparent psychiatric episode.
- We should hone in on the numerous failures that occurred. Years prior, his family had repeatedly tried to check him into psychiatric treatment. And yet his mother found herself denied aid because the hospital did not have enough bed space.
- Mr. Brown’s 911 call, combined with his significant psychiatric history, indicated that he needed urgent care. Instead, police charged him with a misdemeanor and sent him to jail.
- This case raises troubling questions about the availability of psychiatric treatment in North Carolina and the limitations of relying on law enforcement to handle cases involving serious mental health breakdowns.
- A serious conversation could lead to dramatic improvements both locally and even nationally, because there is a severe shortage of psychiatric beds across the country.
- That conversation did not happen. Instead, politicians have blamed “soft on crime” DAs and bail reform, pointing to Mr. Brown’s prior record and his release on a pending case.
- The “soft-on-crime” allegation probably came as a surprise to the prosecutor who handled most of Mr. Brown’s prior cases. He is a Republican whom Donald Trump promoted in 2017 to lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Western District of North Carolina.
- Bail reform had absolutely nothing to do with Decarlos Brown’s release on a misdemeanor. His pending misdemeanor, 8 months earlier, is the exact sort of low-level non-violent offense that would result in release pending resolution of the case in most systems across the country, in Red and Blue jurisdictions alike.
- Mr. Brown was and is a severely mentally ill man, currently being evaluated for competency to stand trial. We can learn from our failures here and ensure that people experiencing psychotic breaks get help; but nothing about the political discourse suggests that will happen.
Mass Shootings: We Don’t Seem To Want To Prevent Them
- Over the last several decades, this country has witnessed devastating school shootings, from Uvalde to Parkland to the shooting at Florida State University. The list is horrifyingly long.
- Each one presents a case study in how we fail to protect our kids’ safety and instead resort to politics. On August 27, 2025, at Annunciation School in Minneapolis, an individual shot students as they prayed in morning mass. The shooting left a 10-year-old and 8-year-old dead, and 21 other victims injured.
- There were numerous conversations that should have happened after that shooting. One evergreen question that should have been resolved after Sandy Hook is why there are so few barriers to purchasing an AR-15.
- There are also plenty of questions about access to mental health treatment. Videos uploaded onto YouTube shortly before the shooting – since removed – showed an extremely unwell person with clear signs of illness.
- The video, along with messages inscribed on the bullets, exposed the dangerous cycle of online glorification that appears to increasingly inspire mass shooting tragedies.
- Unfortunately, the Trump administration has cancelled numerous research studies into the impact of harmful online content. And the Administration and its allies spent no time discussing any meaningful limits on the sale of weapons of war, or an assessment of mental health availability.
- Instead, many politicians engaged in vile scapegoating that gravely endangered trans individuals. They followed the same pattern after the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk. The Administration is now weaponizing these events to label trans people as terrorists, which will undoubtedly make that community even more terrified and less safe.
This Administration’s Policies Will Create More Victims Of Crime
- Of course, the weaponization of crime is not the only evidence that politicians often refuse to take crime prevention seriously– we have lots of other evidence in this Administration.
- The Administration’s actions demonstrate that, for all its rhetoric on crime, it has no issue implementing policies that hurt victims and make our communities less safe. Vice President Vance talks about a “mental health crisis” in America, and yet the Administration has stripped out over $13 billion dollars in funds for mental health and substance use disorder resources across the country.
- It eliminated $820 million from evidence-based violence prevention programs in 36 states.
- Nearly all of these programs have been proven to dramatically reduce crime.
We Are At a Crossroads
There is so much that we do not know about what keeps communities safe, and we at Wren do not want to paper over how complicated that question is. We also want to acknowledge that what makes some people feel safe, like a greater police presence, may make other communities–especially historically overpoliced and now immigrant communities–feel less safe. There are no easy answers.
But one thing is certainly true: the weaponization of crime is preventing us from saving lives.
And that is unacceptable. In the last year, we have seen a simultaneous and dramatic decline in both incarceration and in crime. But no level of crime is acceptable and safer streets and lower murder rates are little consolation to those who have suffered real harm. Blaming and attacking those who are committed to making our legal system better while undermining all progress is not only hypocritical; it is dangerous and will cause more and serious long-term harm.