New York City’s Crime Puzzle

History, polls and comparative data show that New York City has more major crime than it should. Gun and lethal violence are down, but overall major crime is too high. That has been the story of New York’s major crime in 2025 and for the last four years. We need to properly diagnose the problems of the present to adjust policy for the future.

Where things stand

Historical perspective is essential. In the 1950s, New York City’s major crime fluctuated between 1,800 and 2,000 index crimes per 100,000 residents. Crime began to rise in the 1960s, peaking at around 10,000 crimes per 100,000 in the early 1980s and again from 1988 to 1990.

Over the next three decades, crime declined, making New York the safest big city in the United States. From 2016 to 2019, index crime reached lows not seen since the 1950s. New York City had a crime rate of 1,987 index crimes per 100,000 residents in 2017; 2,043 in 2018; and 2,030 in 2019.

(Unless otherwise noted, major crime or crime refers here to the federal definition of seven index crimes. They include murder, rape, aggravated assault, robbery, burglary, larceny/theft and motor vehicle theft.)

Crime then increased during the Adams administration (between 2022-2025) to levels not seen since the first year of Mayor Bloomberg’s term in 2002, reaching approximately 3,000 index crimes per 100,000 residents (or nearly 250,000 index crimes per year). Crime decreased by 3% from 2024 to 2025 — but it remained around 45% above the 2017 level.

Public opinion surveys also show that people think crime is too high. In September 2025, the New York Times/Siena Poll found that crime ranked as the most important issue for the largest share of likely voters in the 2025 mayoral election (27%), surpassing the cost of living (26%) and housing/rent prices (19%). That same month, only 25% of registered voters thought crime in New York City had “gotten better” over the last year.

Finally, the city’s trend dynamics differ markedly from those of the rest of the state and the nation. In the United States, index crime was down 8% in 2024 and another 10% in preliminary 2025 data, to its lowest level since 1960. Index crime in 2025 is estimated to be 25% lower than in 2019. Index crimes in upstate New York were down 7% in 2024, and a double-digit decrease is estimated for 2025, resulting in the lowest crime levels in six decades.

So while New York City remains one of the safest big cities in the United States, there is no reason to celebrate current crime rates based on the three criteria discussed above.

As I see it, there are three burning questions about crime in New York City in 2025:

1. Why were gun and lethal violence totals down in 2025, but not major crime overall?
2. Why was major crime down elsewhere in 2025 but not in New York City?
3. How can we return the city’s crime rate in 2026 to the levels of 2016-2019 and reduce crime by 70,000-80,000 crimes?

This assessment offers preliminary answers to these questions and outlines a road map for areas that need immediate attention.

Why were gun and lethal violence down in 2025, but not major crime overall?

New York City, which started to track shootings in the 1990s, registered more than 5,000 shootings in 1993. Shootings fell in the 1990s and 2000s, but New York City still had over 1,100 shootings in the last year of the Bloomberg administration. From 2017 to 2019, New York had three consecutive years with fewer than 800 shootings per year. Then, shootings doubled in 2020 and 2021, and the targeted work of reducing shootings renewed.

In 2025, for the first time, New York City had fewer than 700 shootings in a calendar year (688), a total that’s 9% lower than the prior low, and a new record. That is remarkable.

In 2025, New York also had the third-lowest murder rate (305 murders, or 3.6 murders per 100,000) since the postwar historic low of 1951 (244 murders, or 3.1 murders per 100,000). That’s near the lows of 2017 (292 murders, or 3.4 murders per 100,000) and 2018 (295 murders, or 3.5 murders per 100,000).

There is no question that the City’s data-driven strategy — starting with the work of the police and prosecutors taking down gangs and removing guns from the streets — along with record-high investments in violence interruption and community-based programming, is helping to successfully drive down gun violence.

That said, it is worth noting that New York City’s progress in reducing gun and lethal violence is nothing out of the ordinary when compared to current national and local dynamics.

After three years of declines (11% in 2023, 15% in 2024, and a preliminary 18% in 2025), the U.S. murder rate in 2025 is expected to hit its lowest postwar level (from 1946 to the present), or approximately 4.1 murders per 100,000 in 2025.

Similarly, sharp decreases in murders have occurred across the country. For example, Los Angeles had the lowest homicide rate recorded since 1959. Chicago homicides fell to the lowest level in 60 years after a 30% drop in 2025. Philadelphia’s 2025 homicides hit their lowest total since 1966. San Francisco recorded its lowest number of murders in over six decades in 2024 and then went lower still in 2025, recording its lowest number of murders since 1954. In 2025, among the 17 most populous cities in the United States (those with more than 800,000 residents), three cities had a murder rate lower than New York’s: San Jose, San Diego and San Francisco.

We also see more progress in reducing gun violence in upstate New York in the jurisdictions under the Gun Involved Violence Elimination (GIVE) program. The nationally recognized initiative provides State funding to local law enforcement agencies and supports 28 jurisdictions (including Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers and Long Island, among others) in 21 counties. As in New York City, after record years in the 2017 to 2019 period (679 shootings in 2019), gun violence almost doubled upstate in 2020 and 2021. In 2022, shootings started to decrease. After setting a record low in 2024 with just 587 shootings, shootings in upstate GIVE jurisdictions went down again in 2025 by another 17% to 475. That’s 30% fewer shootings than the 2019 low.

To give a sense of the gap between upstate and the city’s performance, New York City would need to have 163 fewer shootings than it did in 2025 (from 688 to 525 shootings) to be on par with the reductions upstate.

Similarly, compared to the low of 2019 (248 murders or 2.2 murders per 100,000), the 2025 upstate murders were down by more than 10% by September. Although we do not have the final number for all murders, upstate murders by firearm were down 25% in 2025. Based on preliminary data, the upstate murder rate is likely to be between 5% and 10% lower than the prepandemic low of 2019, outpacing the New York City decline.

What accounts for this variation in performance between New York City and the rest of the state or other big cities in the United States? We must always bring a measure of humility to connecting cause and effect in crime declines. But other places seemed to have been more successful in utilizing the components that have also been the hallmark of New York’s past success: a combination of data-driven precision policing, deterrence-focused strategies driven by police and prosecutors (including hot-spot policing, gang takedowns and the daily work of the multiagency Gun Violence Strategies Partnership), along with investments in non-law enforcement initiatives that reduce mortality, from summer youth employment and violence interruption programs to streetlights and other environmental design.

In short, when it comes to gun violence and homicide, New York City is historically safe and is experiencing positive year-over-year trends. The numbers for January 2026 are impressive and point to an acceleration in the downward trend. But New York from 2022 to 2025 has not been leading the nation as it once did. This is a notable thing in and of itself.

But what gets especially interesting is comparing the City’s ability to drive declines in gun violence and homicide to its seeming inability in 2025 to significantly move the needle in a positive direction when it comes to other types of offenses.

Why was crime down elsewhere but not in New York City?

The United States overall experienced unprecedented new lows in major crime in 2024 and 2025.

The 2024 crime victimization survey (covering crimes experienced from July 2023 to November 2024) already indicated a downward trend and the fact that crime victimizations were near historic lows.

In 2025, the FBI Crime Data Explorer dashboard indicates that index crime is down roughly 11% nationwide, following an 8.5% decrease in 2024. The estimated 2025 crime rate (approximately 1,876 crimes per 100,000) fell to levels not seen since 1960, when there were 1,887 index crimes per 100,000.

All major cities in the United States, including the group of 17 cities with more than 800,000 residents, experienced decreases in index crime in 2025. Los Angeles crime was down 15%, Chicago down 16%, Houston down 12%, Phoenix down 10%, Philadelphia down 6%, San Antonio down 14%, Dallas down 11%, Fort Worth down 17%, San Jose down 7%, Austin down 6%, Charlotte down 7%, Columbus down 20% and San Francisco down 25%.

By comparison, New York City was down 3%, lagging behind the pack.

Outside the confines of New York City, New York State experienced double-digit reductions in crime, and new lows. A review of available preliminary 2025 data suggests that the estimated 2025 upstate crime rate of approximately 1,400 crimes per 100,000 was the lowest rate since 1965. In the first eight months of 2025, violent crime decreased by 13% and property crime decreased by 16%, according to data from the FBI Crime Data Explorer Discovery Tool and the State’s Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS).

Nothing exemplifies the problem of crime in New York City more than the rise in aggravated assaults and larcenies. Under Mayor Adams, in 2024, aggravated assaults were at 2000-2001 levels. Felony assaults, the most serious assaults, were up to levels not seen since 1997, and once again they were up in 2025 at a time when murders and shootings were declining at a remarkable rate. Larceny was above its 2000 level. Aggravated assaults and larcenies account for 80% of all index crimes.

Why is New York City lagging behind the state and the nation in crime declines, when 30 years ago it led the state and the nation, setting an example of how to reduce victimization and disorder? Why hasn’t the City been able to implement a strategy that effectively reduces both lethal violence and crime overall?

Several factors may explain this. However, one likely contributing factor is the mismanagement and incompetence of the Adams administration. While New York State was establishing new partnerships across jurisdictions to address various crime problems, from motor vehicle and retail thefts to the rise in domestic violence and aggravated assaults, the City fell short. One area where the partnership took place, the subway, saw significant progress — the lowest levels of crime in 16 years.

How do we return to the city’s recent lows?

The City’s goal should be to return crime rates to the levels of 2017-2019, which means reducing crime by at least 70,000 incidents annually.

Why is New York City lagging behind other places? Four dynamics seem to separate New York City from other places.

There is one strategy that does not seem to work in New York City — the deterring effect of certain, swift and fair enforcement — and three initiatives that have not been explored and are worth pursuing.

First, what not to do. Looking at the first three quarters of each year, arrests went up from 141,063 in 2022 to 212,486 in 2025. Arrests are up 50%, yet crime is almost on par with 2022, the first year of the Adams administration. Increasing the number of arrests by itself is not an effective approach: For an arrest to have an effect on crime, a prosecutor needs to have enough evidence to prosecute successfully. But today, prosecutors are expressing their doubt about the quality of the evidence through their rising declination rates: Prosecutors currently decline to prosecute 18.5% of all arrests, up from 10% in 2019, and 54% of arrests are dismissed, up from 45% in 2019. The outcome is that only 1 in 4 cases results in a conviction, compared to roughly a 50/50 split prior to the pandemic. (To be clear, conviction does not equate with incarceration, as 60% of convictions result in probation, fines, conditional discharges and other noncarceral outcomes.)

In the 2010s, the perceptual deterrence theory showed that the certainty of the outcome is more important than the severity. It is possible to reduce crime, unnecessary enforcement and incarceration if we have a strong strategy that emphasizes swiftness, certainty and fairness. The City must return to an enforcement that deters criminal conduct.

So what else should New York City leaders and policing practitioners do, then? There are three specific initiatives worth pursuing given the current resources available.

First, there is the need for a place-based, borough-based strategy. The Bronx’s crime rate is approximately 3,750 crimes per 100,000 residents, which is 25% higher than the city’s average. The Bronx crime rate remains nearly unchanged from its 2000 level, when it was around 3,900 crimes per 100,000. Using CompStat data that only measure the seven major felony offenses, the Bronx had 13% more offenses in 2025 than under Giuliani in 2001. More importantly, from 2001 to 2025, felony assaults increased by 64% and grand larcenies rose by 108%. The City needs a comprehensive place-based plan for the Bronx and beyond. The NYPD seems to agree and has announced a new initiative for the Bronx. You cannot fix the city without fixing the Bronx.

Second, a recent report from the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice shows that the age curve is changing, locally and nationally. The share of felony arrests for individuals under 18 years old and those aged 18 to 24 has decreased from 37% of all felony arrests to 31%. However, the share for the group aged 35 to 44 has increased from 16% to 22%. From 2018 to 2024, the number of felony arrests for the 35-44 age group almost doubled from 4,376 to 8,437. Equally important, as the rearrest rate for the age group under 25 years old has remained stable, the felony rearrest rate for the 35-44 age group has increased from 24% in 2018 to 33% in 2024. They recidivate more often. That group now has the highest rearrest rate of all groups. Further, the violent felony rearrest or recidivism rate has also increased from 16% in 2018 to 26% in 2024. An analysis of the Rikers population also shows that this group has, on average, more open cases than their young counterparts. The City needs a comprehensive, people-centered plan for this age group, similar to the many initiatives available for youth and young people, such as summer youth employment. The City needs to develop a specific program for this cohort and understand a fundamental finding from Robert Sampson on crime and life courses: There are significant cohort differences in the historical contexts through which individuals come of age. Cohort fortunes diverge due to crime and enforcement rates.

Third, the OCA Pretrial Release dashboard was created with DCJS to aid in studying the 2019 bail reforms. The tool indicates that, for the last available time period, from June 2024 to June 2025, the overall rearrest rate in the New York City Criminal Court was 19% (18% for release-on-own-recognizance cases and 16% for bail-set cases). (Note: There were 200,745 arraignments during this period.) By comparison, the rearrest rate was 44% (15,778 out of 36,066) for cases on supervised release or nonmonetary conditions. If there is a warrant for failure to appear in court or other reasons (9,863), the rearrest rate for people on supervised release increases to 72% (7,079 out of 9,863). These are cases in which the risks of flight, noncompliance with court conditions and reoffending are highly correlated. These individuals are under the supervision of the court and the City; the City needs a comprehensive network analysis and plan for this group.

This is not a comprehensive strategy, but rather some of the steps that are needed in the months ahead to reduce crime in certain areas, just as the City has reduced gun violence. For a comprehensive initiative, much more work is needed to develop a crime strategy similar to the plan that brought crime and violence to the lowest levels in decades in the 2016-2019 period.