During a recent government meeting, a witness passionately defended the effectiveness of crime policies in Minnesota and California, countering claims that these states are \"soft on crime.\" The speaker, who has personal experiences with crime, highlighted that both states have lower murder rates than the national average, with Minnesota ranking 12th lowest in the nation. He argued that if the entire country had matched Minnesota's murder rate since the start of the century, approximately 186,000 lives could have been saved.

The witness pointed out that California, under Attorney General Kamala Harris, also maintained a murder rate below the national average, significantly lower than that of several red states. He attributed the success of these states to a combination of accountability measures, police funding, and prevention programs aimed at addressing poverty and mental health issues.

He emphasized that Minnesota ranks 10th in police spending per capita, while California ranks first, and noted that blue states generally invest more in law enforcement than red states. The speaker argued that failing to adequately fund police or address underlying social issues constitutes a \"soft on crime\" approach.

Additionally, he addressed the topic of illegal immigration, asserting that studies indicate undocumented immigrants commit fewer violent crimes than the general population. He pointed out that the states with the highest murder rates—Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama—also have some of the lowest immigrant populations, suggesting that the majority of crime is perpetrated by American citizens rather than migrants.

The witness concluded by challenging the narrative that Republican-led states are tougher on crime, citing statistical evidence that consistently shows higher murder rates in red states compared to blue states. He called for a more nuanced understanding of crime and its root causes, urging policymakers to focus on accountability and prevention rather than rhetoric.