Los Angeles's Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and police chief Bill Bratton have been crowing about crime rates that supposedly make the city as safe as it was in 1956. But does their rosy picture really hang straight?
A lengthy L.A. Weekly cover story from last week gives some reasons to doubt the implications of Bratton's claim. Some excerpts:
Aaron Epstein, who worked on Hollywood Boulevard in 1956 and still owns property on the Walk of Fame, says, "People felt safe back then. We didn't have prostitutes on the corners, we didn't have dope dealers in the streets, and we didn't have gangs."
Andrew Karmen, a sociology professor at the highly respected John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, who examined L.A.'s crime rates of 1956 and 2007, says, "Looking at murders and robberies -- the crime that people really care about -- we're not back yet to 1956 crime levels."
.....Bratton, the former top cop in Boston and New York City, seems to be abusing crime statistics partly to prove that his department deserves more money amidst budget cuts, and partly to maneuver into a position where he can take personal credit.
The article notes that most major cities have seen crime drops similar to L.A.'s, making any implication that it is special effort or wisdom on Bratton's part responsible questionable, and that Angelenos of the 50s remember a time when people didn't feel they had to lock their doors and when notable gang fights involved chains, not guns.
And by lumping together all crimes in a certain reporting category, Bratton manages to imply that more significant crimes such as homicide and robbery are back to mid-'50s levels, when they are not. Both murder and robbery rates are more than twice as bad as 1956. (LAPD informed the Weekly that they no longer use the 1956 figures, now saying L.A. crime rates are equivalent to 1961, still a stretch as far as general quality of life goes.)
For a statistical look at modern-day L.A. crime, see the LAPD's own Crime Maps and COMPSTAT site.
The image associated with this post was taken by Flickr user Sean Yoda Rouse. It was used under user Creative Commons license.
Subscribe to City of Angles's feed.
money quote: Both murder and robbery rates are more than twice as bad as 1956.
Sense of safety is relative - depends on things like who you are, where you are, when you're there. My elderly parents live in well-policed (and expensive!) retirement community and they're terrified of crime all the time. Too much TV!
So many things go into making a city 'safe,' and crime is only one of them. Even if the crime rate was at a 1956 level in L.A., that would hardly mean we'd reverted back to some shangri-la time in which everybody was happy and violence-free. that's a 50s myth. bratton sure seems to overblowing his role in the myth and/or reality.
In 1956 LA's population was smaller and there were fewer police officers. It was a time when my community lived in fear of all police, especially LAPD. A relationship sparking two civil revolts and generating more cynicism. Times more relevant when talking about homicide statistics. In 1988, they were hovering around 1000, by 1992 at 800+. Staggering numbers compared to last year.
Who deserves credit? Lots of people who believe our success is the only important issue. As Deputy Chief Kenneth Garner always reminded us, "Are we perfected (LAPD)? No indeed, but we've come a long way."
More reasonable to focus on homicide statistics in this century. Are they down, Yes.
Thank somebody