The Trump administration’s plans to expand a surge of federal law enforcement into cities beset by a spike in violent crime is coming under criticism from gun control groups, even though the program called “Operation LeGend” ultimately amounts to greater enforcement of the very gun control laws that they helped to put on the books.

President Trump outlined why he’s sending more federal resources to cities like Milwaukee and Albuquerque in a White House press briefing on Wednesday, highlighting some of the recent problems in Democrat-controlled cities.

For decades, politicians running many of our nation’s major cities have put the interests of criminals above the rights of law-abiding citizens.  These same politicians have now embraced the far-left movement to break up our police departments, causing violent crime in their cities to spiral — and I mean spiral seriously out of control.

In New York City, over 300 people were shot in the last month alone.  A 277 — at least — percent increase over the same period of a year ago.  Murders this year have spiked 27 percent in Philadelphia and 94 percent in Minneapolis compared to the same period in 2019.

Perhaps no citizens have suffered more from the menace of violent crime than the wonderful people of Chicago — a city I know very well.  At least 414 people have been murdered in the city this year, a roughly 50 percent increase over last year.  More than 1,900 people have been shot.  These are numbers that aren’t even to be believed.

Until just a few months ago, gun control groups would likely have cheered the president’s decision. After all, more federal law enforcement resources means more opportunities to enforce federal gun laws. Since the start of the “defund police” movement, however, gun control advocates have found themselves in the increasingly awkward position of advocating for more gun laws to be put on the books, while downplaying the idea of actually enforcing them.

Let’s be clear, unleashing federal troops into our cities will not solve gun violence. The solutions — stronger federal gun laws, lifesaving funding for violence interruption programs — are sitting on Mitch McConnell’s desk. We’re not falling for this desperate show of dominance. https://t.co/N7uT7ITVza

— Kris Brown (@KrisB_Brown) July 22, 2020

That’s Brady president Kris Brown taking the bizarre position that sending federal law enforcement officers to places like Chicago won’t reduce violent crime, but putting a few new federal gun laws on the books will. Brown’s tweet wasn’t just a casual aside, either. The anti-gun group has gone so far as to put out a statement blasting the idea of “more policing,” even though their ideology demands that armed agents of the State

Brady urges the federal government to listen to impacted communities and local leaders rather than add federal policing to American cities. While Brady supports federal policies to address gun violence, this “surge” in policing does not accomplish that goal and has been rejected by local officials. Rather than engaging in more over-policing, the federal government should instead listen to experts, local officials, and those most affected by gun violence to identify and understand how to reduce gun violence in urban communities.

The problem for Brady is that most “experts” and many community activists have moved away from the idea that we can ban our way to safety by putting more gun control laws in place. If you believe that the criminal justice system and policing are systemically racist, then every new gun control law just exacerbates the problem, which means that anti-gun groups like Brady, Everytown for Gun Safety, Moms Demand Action, and Giffords have actually made the problem worse.

The answer would seem to be to get rid of the non-violent, possessory offenses for things like possessing a “large capacity” magazine or an “assault weapon” and discriminatory licensing and registration laws and focus law enforcement resources on arresting and fully prosecuting violent criminals. That would require a complete reset of the gun control movement, however, and that’s not going to happen.

Instead, the modern gun control movement is completely at odds with the de-policing movement. Since both exist under the umbrella of the Democrat Party, activists like Brown are now desperately trying to figure out a way to stay relevant, even if it results in bizarre positions like demanding more gun control laws and less policing. It’s an untenable position, but since it’s unlikely that they’ll get much pushback from their ostensible allies on the Left (at least before the elections in November), they’re going to try to stick with it in the coming months.