Seattle Would Rather Fund Guards Than Lock Up Thieves

There’s something deeply backwards about a city that would rather pay for security guards than prosecute criminals. But here we are in Seattle, where socialist Mayor Katie Wilson just announced a $1.7 million plan to fund security for grocery stores getting hammered by theft and vandalism. Let that sink in for a second. The city isn’t putting more cops on the street or backing prosecutors who actually want to lock up repeat offenders. No, they’re essentially handing out taxpayer money so businesses can hire private security to deal with the mess the city refuses to clean up.

Wilson calls it essential to making sure every Seattle resident has access to affordable groceries nearby. What she won’t say out loud is that the real solution involves something far simpler and infinitely cheaper in the long run. Arrest criminals. Prosecute them. Put them in jail. Repeat as necessary until the message sinks in that Seattle isn’t a free-for-all shopping experience where the merchandise leaves without payment.

The plan spreads funding across 10 independent grocery stores for improvements and business support, plus one-time security upgrades for stores dealing with rampant theft. It sounds generous until you realize what’s really happening here. The city created the problem through soft-on-crime policies and now wants credit for throwing money at the symptoms while ignoring the disease.

Jason Rantz, the Seattle-based KTTH host and conservative commentator, nailed it when he called this a bandage on a bullet wound. The best support any business can get is a functioning justice system and a fully staffed police department that actually enforces the law. You know what works? Consequences. Real ones. Not social programs or restorative justice circles or whatever other feel-good nonsense gets dreamed up in city hall. Put criminals in jail and watch crime rates drop. It’s not complicated.

This isn’t about thinking outside the box or finding innovative solutions. The box works fine. Open it up and you’ll find decades of proven crime-fighting methods that work everywhere they’re actually implemented. But Seattle’s leadership seems allergic to the obvious, preferring instead to experiment with taxpayer dollars while ordinary citizens watch their neighborhoods deteriorate.

The backlash has been swift and brutal, which tells you something about how fed up people are. Social media erupted with residents asking why the city can’t just identify criminals and stop the crime instead of subsidizing its aftermath. One observer pointed out that Seattle has become arguably the worst city in America for rampant crime and lawlessness, problems that have gotten exponentially worse over the past few years. Hard to argue with that assessment when you’re literally funding private security because public safety has collapsed.

Here’s the thing about security guards that Wilson apparently hasn’t considered. What exactly are they supposed to do? They can’t make arrests in most cases. They observe and report, maybe detain someone if they’re willing to risk a lawsuit. Criminals will walk right past them with stolen goods because everyone knows there won’t be real consequences. The cops won’t arrest shoplifters and prosecutors won’t charge them. So you end up with expensive theater that makes politicians feel productive while accomplishing nothing.

Someone pointed out online that none of this was necessary in Seattle just 15 years ago. Regular people could shop at regular stores without security guards watching over the laundry detergent and baby formula. That’s the America most of us remember and want back. Not a militarized shopping experience, just normal life where stealing has consequences and businesses don’t need armed guards to survive.

The deeper issue here goes beyond Seattle. This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of government’s core responsibility. Protecting citizens and their property isn’t optional. It’s not something you get around to after funding every pet project and social experiment. It’s the baseline, the foundation everything else rests on. When cities abandon that duty, they forfeit their legitimacy.

Wilson marched in barista picket lines and told people to boycott Starbucks. She’s got plenty of energy for progressive activism. But enforcing the law and backing police? That apparently requires a level of political courage she hasn’t found yet. So instead we get this halfway measure that spends public money without solving public problems. Businesses still get robbed, criminals still walk free, and taxpayers foot the bill for both the crime and the ineffective response to it.

The fix remains obvious to anyone willing to see it. Staff and fund the police department. Let officers do their jobs. Support prosecutors who actually prosecute. Fill the jails if necessary. Crime responds to incentives like everything else in life. Make it costly and risky, and you’ll get less of it. Make it consequence-free, and you’ll get exactly what Seattle has now.