That's the wrong analogy - it's not about loosening the laws. It's about reducing the overhead/framework for something that is no longer as necessary. It shou

That's the wrong analogy - it's not about loosening the laws. It's about reducing the overhead/framework for something that is no longer as necessary. It should be "homicides are down, should we reduce the number of cops and investigators?" And the answer is probably yes. But of course we know that in practicality no municipality would say they are letting a bunch of cops go because crime is down. Even though they arguably should. Or at the very least, don't replace them as they retire and let the number naturally decrease. Because the number of people who will go out murdering people solely because there are less cops is near zero. That's not really a driving factor.