Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 6:00 AM ET, 11/29/2007

Rudy the Crime Buster

By Michael Dobbs

Giuliani announcing fall in crime rate as mayor of New York

"Under Mayor Giuliani's leadership, overall crime was cut by 56 percent, murder was cut by 66 percent, and New York City--once considered the crime capital of the country--became the safest large city in America according to the FBI."

--Join Rudy 2008 website

Rudy Giuliani has made the dramatic drop in the New York City crime rate a central theme of his presidential campaign. He has been critical of rivals, such as Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, for being lax on crime. Violent crimes fell sharply between 1994 and 2001 while he was mayor and have continued to fall under his successor, Michael Bloomberg. But the crime rate also fell sharply in other large U.S. cities, such as Los Angeles and Chicago. Has he exaggerated his own achievement?

The Facts

The FBI warns against comparing the crime rates of individual American cities for the purposes of ranking. Each city has a unique ethnic and socio-economic makeup, which affect the crime figures. Reporting rates differ from one jurisdiction to another. That said, ranking American cities by their crime rates is a favorite pasttime of politicians (and journalists), particularly if they can show that their city is somehow ahead. So what do the FBI statistics tell us about Giuliani's crime-busting exploits?

Take a look at the following chart, which I compiled from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, available here. It shows the violent crime rate for New York and three other large American cities over two decades. Contrary to Giuliani's repeated claims on the campaign trail, it is not the case that New York was the "crime capital of the country" prior to 1994, when he took office. Los Angeles, Chicago, and Boston all had higher violent crime rates than New York in 1994. Los Angeles and Chicago had higher murder rates. (See second chart.)

"Giuliani has elevated exaggeration to a new art form," said Ely Silverman, author of 'NYPD Battles Crime,' a standard academic account of the reasons for declining crime rates in New York. "There were other cities, such as Detroit, that had much higher crime rates."

The chart shows that the decline in violent crime in New York was a little steeper in New York than some other big cities during the Giuiliani years, but it was part of a general nationwide trend. Philip Kafinitz, professor of sociology at the City University of New York Graduate Center, notes that the drop in the crime rate began under Giuliani's Democratic predecessor, David Dinkins, and has continued under Bloomberg, who has adopted "a kindler, gentler approach" than Giuliani. The present head of the NYPD, Raymond Kelly, served in the same post under Dinkins.

Apportioning the credit for New York's falling crime rate is a matter of considerable controversy among criminologists. Some attribute the decline to improved policing methods, and the "zero tolerance" approach pioneered by Giuliani and his first police commissioner, William Bratton. Others stress demographic and sociological factors, including the rise in the immigrant and student population of New York. (According to Andrew Karmen, a criminologist at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, students and recent immigrants tend to commit fewer crimes than other residents.)

"There is a big debate between the people who say the police did it, and those who say a combination of the police and other things," said David Kennedy, director of the center for crime prevention and control at the John Jay Center for Criminal Justice in New York. "That said, it was Giuliani's watch. I do think Giuliani was the catalyst...he made himself very publicly responsible for fixing the crime problem in the city."

The next chart shows the decline in murder rates in several American cities. Once again, the decline was particularly marked under Giuliani, but it has continued under Bloomberg, and is hardly unique to New York. As you can see from the chart, the New York murder rate peaked in 1990, four years before Giuliani came to office, and has been falling consistently since then. The most impressive feature about the New York trend is that the decline has been sustained for a longer period than in other cities, such as Boston and Chicago, which show a dip followed by a rise.

The Pinocchio Test

The issue is not whether crime fell sharply in New York under Giuliani--but whether the former mayor has exaggerated the role he played in bringing it down. Crime statistics are notoriously complicated, so I welcome contributions to this debate. I will issue a verdict after listening to your views.


(About our rating scale.)

By Michael Dobbs  | November 29, 2007; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Candidate Record, Candidate Watch, Social Issues, Verdict Pending  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Tells a Fib
Next: No Sanctuary from Mitt and Rudy


Peter Pan could have been mayor of New York and the crime/murder rate would have still fallen in a similar fashion. The nationwide crime decline began around 1992. The common denominator is the economy -- the single most significant influence on the crime rate. If Mayor Giuliani can rightfully take credit for the 8-year economic expansion the nation enjoyed under President Clinton, then award him a Gepetto star.

Posted by: Stonecreek | November 29, 2007 10:35 AM | Report abuse

There is something to be said about the perception of New York City during hte Giuliani years.

Regardless of that the statistics say, the perception of the city was terrible when Giuliani took over. When Giuliani left office and continuing today, NYC is viewed as a much safer, more modern place. When People think of NYC now, they think business, banking, and tourism. I remember growing up, the only thinkg that came to mind about NYC was dangerous.

When Giuliani talks about solving problems for the whole country the way he did in NYC, the statistics are not as important as the image. America today also has an image problem, and if Giuliani can have the same success in reshaping our image the way he shaped the image of NYC, then it would be quite impressive. And while it is is huge task, it is fair for him to cite his past records of turning around a city that had a horrible reputation.

Posted by: Paul S. | November 29, 2007 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Fact-Checker, it might be worth noting that your chart for violent crime shows Boston bucking the downward trend and instead trending slightly upward during the Romney years.

As for Giuliani, it seems to me that the best you can establish is that people disagree about his personal role. Does that amount to a falsehood?

Posted by: Tom T. | November 29, 2007 11:34 AM | Report abuse

I appreciate the Fact Checker's solicitation of input; I'll do my best.

Three methods in use raise questions.

1. Which crimes? The use of the "violent crime" rate conflates several crimes, and implicitly equates a robbery to a rape to a murder. Separate counts of each crime would be much more meaningful, but what's our simple conclusion in a case like Romney, where violent crimes declined but murders increased? That's why I'd prefer to see only the murder rate used. Apples and apples. Romney's violent crime rate went down while his murder rate went up, so is that good or bad?
2. When? Noting crime trends occurring before and after someone took office are merely the beginning of guesswork at the trend's causation. If NYC started some anti-crime program in the late 1980s, maybe then it would be fair to count the 1988-1991 murder decline against Rudy.
3. Where? Comparing NYC to Chicago and L.A. could only tell you how well Giuliani did *relative* to the other city's mayors. If nationwide data were included in the plots, we could better assess whether Giuliani's numbers were lifted by a rising national tide. If Giuliani's murder rate went down by 60 percent, and the nationwide trend is only 35 percent, then we can more meaningfully credit Giuliani with 25 percent.

Giuliani called Romney's record "mixed" last night rather than "poor," I wonder how much the Fact Checker had to do with that?

Posted by: The Angry One | November 29, 2007 1:56 PM | Report abuse

I can't help but notice that on both charts the crime rate started falling before Giulianni's tenure & continued afterward. Doesn't that imply that something other than Mayor Giulianni's policies are at work?

Likewise, both charts show that crime rates were going down nationwide - before, during & after the mayor's tenure in NYC. Surely his policies were not so effective that they impacted the crime rate nationwide!

Lastly, the authors of Freakonomics have an interesting theory on the subject. I suggest the fact-checker review their hypothesis before ruling on the mayor's claims.

Posted by: bsimon | November 29, 2007 2:08 PM | Report abuse

There is nothing false about his claim.

Posted by: david | November 29, 2007 2:15 PM | Report abuse

To Angry One:

Clearly, when the public (or in this case,the Fact Checker) starts calling politicians on the bull**** they sometimes dream up to say, they start being a lot more careful about saying whatever will best incite the crowds. Good observation.

Posted by: Anonymous | November 29, 2007 3:08 PM | Report abuse

That's why I'm a Fact Checker fan. Some improvements could be made and I sometimes have issues with the number of pinocchios awarded, but on balance it's a "marketplace of ideas" at work.

I just wonder if it's this column or something else that took the edge of Rudy's attack.

Posted by: The Angry One | November 29, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

We all know tht Rudy reduced the crime rate because he said it on almost a daily basis. Who would disagree with him? There is truth in what he says and if you spoke up like the professional Police Commissioner Bratton, you were removed. More inportant is that Rudy is standig on the shoulders of those who did the real heavy lifting in the late 80's and early 90's. Mayor Dinkins who added additional tax burden on the residents to increase the needed increase in number of police officers. This was the hey day of crime with the crack epidemic. Watch any movie or TV show from this era, there is crack, cocaine, violence and lack of police. Bratton reduced crime by 50% from 90-92 when he was the commissiner of the subways under dinkins. Bratton promoted Jack Maples who was an officer with the transit police and perfected the Compstat medthod of crime fighting. Rudy touts compstat often but little to no reference to Bratton and Maples. And crime has fallen after Rudy left under Bratton. Have you ever heard Rudy give credit to Dinkins for taking the hard decisions during a poor economic performance in NYC of raising taxes so he could put more police on the street to help the citizens? No. Rudy stood on the shoulders of those who came before him and will never acknolwedge that. That is the type of person he is. Respectfully Bill from the Bronx

Posted by: Bill | November 29, 2007 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Paul S. said: "There is something to be said about the perception of New York City during hte Giuliani years."

true enough. but on what is that perception based? in this case, it was actually based on reality. New York was fairly crime-ridden, and then it wasn't. The perception changed because it really was safer. But the numbers seem to make it difficult to say that Giuliani was behind that change.

As for the true cause, i tend to agree with several of the other commenters; as the wise man once said: "It's the economy, stupid."

Posted by: /b | November 29, 2007 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Lets Fact Check Rudys ties to Kerick

Posted by: Ben Matheny | November 30, 2007 8:45 AM | Report abuse

So many of them, and the public keeps the faith.

In almost every appearance as he campaigns for the Republican presidential nomination, Rudolph W. Giuliani cites a fusillade of statistics and facts to make his arguments about his successes in running New York City and the merits of his views.

Discussing his crime-fighting success as mayor, Mr. Giuliani told a television interviewer that New York was "the only city in America that has reduced crime every single year since 1994."

Do you check the statistics cited by candidates, or do you take their claims at face value?


Posted by: PollM | November 30, 2007 10:02 AM | Report abuse

I agree with bsimon regarding the Freakonomics comment. The thesis regarding abortion may not be politically correct, but I think it plays a significant role in the drop of crime.

Regarding NYC crime, the police commissioner and others - starting before Rudy's tenure - employed the "Broken Windows theory" [read Gladwell's The Tipping Point] which Rudy even alluded to in the debate on Wed.

I believe that the policies of stricly enforcing low level crimes (like fare beating and grafiti on subways) gave NYC that steeper decline in crimes then other cities. Rudy was smart to keep the policies in place that were working for NYC. I do not believe that he deserves more credit though than others.

Posted by: Anonymous | November 30, 2007 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Rudy: "9-11, terrorists 9-11, Hillary-Care, 9-11, Hillary causes murder to go up in 9-11, I know because I say so 9-11".

Posted by: koala | November 30, 2007 12:21 PM | Report abuse

I think it's worth noting the NY Times article on the matter.

"Discussing his crime-fighting success as mayor, Mr. Giuliani told a television interviewer that New York was "the only city in America that has reduced crime every single year since 1994." In New Hampshire this week, he told a public forum that when he became mayor in 1994, New York "had been averaging like 1,800, 1,900 murders for almost 30 years." When a recent Republican debate turned to the question of fiscal responsibility, he boasted that "under me, spending went down by 7 percent."

All of these statements are incomplete, exaggerated or just plain wrong. And while, to be sure, all candidates use misleading statistics from time to time, Mr. Giuliani has made statistics a central part of his candidacy as he campaigns on his record."

I think it can be fairly said that crime did go down under Mayor Giuliani. How much credit he deserves is quite debatable but that will always be true in politics. What should earn him Pinocchios is that many of the statistical claims he makes are simply false. The claim on the website is tame compared to his claims while stumping.

Thanks for the opportunity to provide input. Hope you don't mind that I'm citing a competitor.

Posted by: Greg Sanders | November 30, 2007 12:35 PM | Report abuse


Ignore Freakanomics. If any of those ideas could have made it into a peer-reviewed publication, they would be there. To examine abortion as the causal mechanism for crime reduction, one needs an accurate pre-Roe abortion rate, which is, by definition, impossible. It's also pretty much the stupidest thing ever considered--just because it's provocative doesn't make it right, or even worthy of consideration.

The American Society of Criminology has itself condemned "city rankings" as the Fact Checker points out. Crime occurs largely in a neighborhood setting, of which there are many in a city. To suggest that a city is "safer" than another is meaningless--there are perfectly safe neighborhoods in Detroit. What Guiliani must answer is whether, and which, neighborhoods experienced decreased crime and why. With an overall descending rate nationally, he has a pretty weak leg to stand on from the get go. Is Spanish Harlem safe to walk around in at night yet? Anyone know?

Finally, even assuming that it would be possible to lock up every violent criminal in NY, which is what Guiliani suggests he has done, they all have release dates. Has Guiliani improved reentry programs? Has he assisted reintegration in any way? Made it easier for convicts to get jobs? Housing? Or has he simply given license for cops to bust anyone they dislike, while depriving kids of their parents for 5-10 years?

Sounds like a firm foundation for a crime-free society to me.

Posted by: viv | November 30, 2007 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Bratton, Maples and Annemone had more to do with reducing crime in NYC than Giuliani ever did. Giuliani was too busy chasing skirts, and dismantling the Police Department's Public Information Bureau so he could hog all of the credit for himself.

Posted by: June Nucleus | November 30, 2007 2:14 PM | Report abuse

2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll

The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Every Tuesday Evening.

Posted by: votenic | November 30, 2007 2:58 PM | Report abuse

There has been some recent evidence supporting the theory that decreased exposure to lead (in various forms, including paint and gasoline) can explain much if not all of the decline in violent crime, and crime generally.

It is well documented in the medical literature that lead exposure in infancy and toddlerhood can cause impulsive and sometimes violent behaviors in adolescense and young adulthood.

Theoretically, decreasing lead in the environment will therefore result in less crime (violent and non-violent). I beleive NPR did a report in the past year on a recent study that seems to support this theory.

Could the fact checker explore this avenue of inquiry as well.

Posted by: noahkohn | November 30, 2007 3:04 PM | Report abuse

While it may be true that the crime rate was trending downward due to demographic or economic reasons it is also true that if you hire more police you reduce crime. If you focus the cities energies on the issue of reducing crime and hire enough police then you will reduce crime. That is a function of the Mayor's office and should be credited to the Mayor. That the other effects have a greater or lesser impact is debatable. Focusing on reducing crime and hiring more police will unquestionably reduce crime.

Posted by: kchses | November 30, 2007 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Giuliani is the biggest fraud in US history.

EX: he himself has said it was MAYOR DINKINS' leadership that lowered crime, which is WHY Rudy hired DINKINS' guy, William Bratton to be RUdy's top cop.

The media LOVES to omit this one killer fact.

I have thousands more.

Rudy ADMITS he was in charge of preventing the crack and crime explosion across America during the early 80s, when he was #3 in Reagan's justice dept and personally ran Reagan's War on Drugs!

How'd that go Rudy? Oh yeah: you say you presided over the largest crime increase in USA history.


I can go on and on and on.

Rudy has admitted that most crime in NYC is directly HIS fault. EX: Rudy says that he "corrects" all criminals caught in his Stalin-esque "Dept of "Corrections", but admits that NONE of them are ever rehabilitated, and that most get worse and more criminal each time Rudy "corrected" them.

Look at the stats yourself.

WHO are we to doubt Rudy when he says that 90% of all crime is committed by HIS OWN GRADUATES of his rehabilitation resorts??

Want tons more dirt on this crook?

Posted by: cxb | November 30, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

And for heaven's sake, even RUDY has admitted he COOKED the crime stats.

ASK RUDY YOURSELF: WHY did you omit 3,000 murders from the police stats on 9/11. Were those NOT murders?

Rudy says he kept these numbers out of the books b/c they were an "aberration" just as he got caught doing the same to a 200-plus NYPD shootout---he kept it out of stats on bullets fired by cops!!

THIS ALONE is enough to end his career and maybe jail him for fraud, etc.

even Rudy admits that NYC is maybe the crime capital of the world.

EX: over 500,000,000 graffiti vandalism acts across NYC today! They even did graffiti in the subways tunnels (thank god they weren't terrorists, b/c the largest police force on earth (the NYPD) are incompetent at best), many rooftops (look around when you're on an elevated subway) and so on.

EX: even Rudy admits the first 100% crime rate in history on HIS watch: 100% of subway car windows were destroyed with etching acid and scratchiti! And all windows were actually vandalized at least 3 times and as many as 20. (I've got photos, but I'll take you on a tour of NYC TODAY.)

I'll debate any clown from Team Rudy anyday.

Bring it on, as they say!

Posted by: cxb | November 30, 2007 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, but one more super-insight:

Crime WENT WAY UP UNDER RUDY and he's admitted this.

EX: identity theft exploded; female crimes exploded; school crime exploded; corporate crime exploded; heroin crimes exploded; graffiti crimes exploded (etching acid and scratchiti are the most destructive vandalisms ever in graffiti history!); even Rudy's NYPost just did a COVER story on how POLICE CRIME exploded!


I can go on and on if you'd like.

Posted by: cxb | November 30, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Liberals still refuse to believe that President Clinton putting more funds to policing had anything to do with the drop in crime (he changed the liberal position on crime into a more conservative one).

1.)Liberals still refuse to believe that "2 strikes and your out" rule works.

2.)policing and laws got tougher in the US as a whole in the mid 1990s.

3.)Clinton said that "Kids who commit crimes like adults should be tried as adults".

4.)Americans in the mid 90s ranked crime as their top concern, not education as liberals often do.

5.)There was a conservative revolution in the way we treated criminals.

Guiliani was a part of that revolution. That's the "inconvinient truth" liberals face today - that the liberal ideas they used in the 80s and and early 90s just doesn't don't hug criminals you throw them in jail.

And Oh, Guiliani took on organized crime in New York; don't tell me that was a phantom.

Posted by: Get over yourselves | November 30, 2007 7:25 PM | Report abuse

David Denkins was PRESSURED into putting more police on the streets so that's why crime started to drop.

David Denkins was a liberal mayor who was repeatedly pressured by the New York public to do something about crime; and Denkins was FORCED to do conservative things.

Denkins was finally PRESSURED into putting more police on the streets.

Guiliani who has always been a crime fighter needed no pressure to be tougher on crime since he was tough from day one and crime continued to drop dramatically.

Guiliani did the conservative things that Denkins SHOULD HAVE been doing; from the start.

Posted by: GOP and DNC | November 30, 2007 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Re viv:

Levitt's paper linking abortion to crime rates appeared in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, one of the most respected peer-reviewed economics journals. More broadly, most of the points in Freakanomics were first peer-reviewed papers in respected journals.

Posted by: Erik | November 30, 2007 10:02 PM | Report abuse

America's Mayor ? Law and Order Candidate ?
What kind of Law ? The kind of law that allows you to go onto the floor of the Stock Exchange and arrest 2 men , with the aid of Federal Marshalls wearing Flak Vests and carrying Automatic weapons ? Or in an effort to make a name for yourself, trump up charges against Michael Millican, and try to coerce him into entering a plea bargain arrangement. Then to try to intimidate him further, threaten his brother Lowell . Then go to the home of his father and harass him. Goebels all over again. Or make outlandish statements about your participation in the aftermath of 9-11 ? Did he think the real heros of the cleanup wouldn't speak up and denounce him. People with a lot more credibility than Rudy. Using the taxpayer's money for security for him and his paramour as he traveled back and forth to her digs, to carry on yet another adulterous affair. I know this is a subject for Law and Order, but there is a code of order and the Laws enacted for the Catholic Faith . And Rudy has run roughshod over these as well. His disdain for them are out there for all to see. Marrying his second cousin without a dispensation because a priest, his High School chum, Monsignor Placa told him he didn't need it, the carrying on 2 adulterous affairs afterwards. Forced from Gracie Mansion, going to live with 2 homosexuals and Placa, now defrocked because of pedophile advances.
His open house practice towards Illegal Aliens in N.Y and making it a safe haven for them. A sanctuary city. Back around Sept. Rudy told Glenn Beck on CNN that crossing the border is not a crime. Further he stated to the Press, " Crossing the border and being caught is a misdemeanor." Being an illegal immigrant in this country is subject to deportation, but not prosecution". Wrong, Mr. Prosecutor. Look up a Section of 275 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ( 8 USC 1375 , and it's wording can even be understood by we laymen. Most Illegals have broken the laws contained herin and these are felonies . Giuliani may be thought to be a tough-on-crime candidate by a lot of the Gop, but on Immigration, he is wholly at odds with the views of the vast majority of the Gop base, and with the vast majority of the electorate. He advocates amnesty for millions. He claims he would secure the border but would deport only illegal aliens who've committed big crimes. He said he would deport such Illegals, but then offer a pathe to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
Giuliani continued Koch's Executive order 124 . Not only that, but he sued to keep it intact. ( As in most cases Rudy championed, Federal Courts ruled against him ) Rudy's sanctuary order violated a federal law enacted in 1996 . That was the one that outlawed policies that restricted public employees from inquiring about the immigration status, or reporting immigration violators to Federal Authorites. After trying to keep city employees' hands tied his sanctuary policies came home to roost. In 2002, Mexican gangsters gang-raped and brutally beat a 42 year old Queens woman . 4 of the 5 men arrested were Illegal Aliens. Three of those four, had prior arrest records. There are many more instances of Rudy's Gestapo ideas on running a law and order city . You need only look it up.... We have had 8 years of stubborness in the White House. Rule by an arrogant man surrounded by arrogant men. Men who have let power go to their heads. Bush , Cheney and Rumsfield , rushed to judgement, before letting the inspectors finalize their findings. A terrible war which took the lives of our best and brightest followed , and which is still being waged. Countless innocents were lying dead in the streets, bloody children at their feet. Victims of one man's quest to leave a legacy. Well , he's leaving one. With it he's leaving a Party that boasts more and more deserters from it's ranks every day. We will be in the Middle East for decades. I think it may take that long for the American people to ever trust the Republican party again. If this is what the electorate wants in an administration, and wants to perpetuate it, then vote for Giuliani. For Bush is Giuliani without the lisp.

Posted by: bonas50 | December 1, 2007 12:34 AM | Report abuse

Uh, What was David Dinkins record on fighting organized crime in New York? Uh - ZERO.

Dinkins was mayor of New York, yet the mob was collecting "taxes" behind his back (this is the nightmare that is extremist liberlism when people rely on sociology studies, graphs, and abortions- to fight crime).

Posted by: Blogger | December 1, 2007 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Abortionists put the mafia in New York city behind bars? Gee, I thougt it was the police and Guiliani

Abortionists madee the thousands of arrests and stood on streets to act as deterrents against crime?

Maybe as a Spin on a Seinfeld joke, we should merge the job of police officer and abortionist.

Man, do liberals ever stop with their nutty ideas?

Posted by: Blogger | December 1, 2007 9:54 AM | Report abuse

NEW YORKERS were too LIBERAL for their own good!

Your support for a liberal like Ed Koch - 3 terms; was a failure of your liberal policies and attitudes toward crime.

So you people needed a conservative like Guiliani to clean-up and manage your city.

And for that you are ungrateful because your liberal methods were proven wrong.

Guiliani dragged your liberal city into the 21st century with you people kicking and screaming and complaining.

You are ungrateful and you are most of all "JEALOUS" - jealous that his conservative policies and the police policies worked; and your liberal policies of the 80s failed miserably.

Posted by: observer | December 1, 2007 10:08 AM | Report abuse

the problem with your method is that you rely too much on sociolgists and economists to solve the crime problem in America. Yet if you were in trouble - you would call 911; not call your college professor. Yet you still defer to college professors when your life isn't in danger.

Sociologists who have no police experience are like the nerds who talk about war without having any combat experience.


You should instead rely more on the men and women who fight crime everyday - the police officers who do the DIRTY work that no sociologist in a laboratory would ever want to do.

Ignoring the police as the major reason for the drop in crime is intellectual dishonesty supported by "statistics".

Stupid cities like Washington D.C. still hold on to the liberal idea that crime is about education and gun control.. and they often give the police less credit.

Liberalism doesn't work. If Guliani wants to exaggerate his record - that's OK with me; he's entitled to exaggerate. He's also a politician after all. But Guiliani doesn't do what liberals do - which is downplay the contribution of the police force.

LIberals are not entitled to tell our country how we should fight crime because their policies in t he 80s failed. Please stop giving us advice.

Posted by: How can you ignore the cops | December 1, 2007 11:19 AM | Report abuse


So what if Rudy called New York the crime capital of the world?

Chicago holds the title "The Windy City" but it isn't even in the top 20.

New York is always called "the capital" of this or "something"; so when things go bad it's not so unfair to call it the crime capital of the world; artisitic license and exaggerations - even in the realm of journalism and media are part of the game.

John Carpenter called his movie, "Escape from New York", not "Escape from Detroit".

nitpicking Guiliani over things like this isn't productive when it isn't as bad as Bill Clinton exaggerating his opposition to the Iraq war; and his wife's indicisiveness on things like driver's licences. Now that is an example of complete "revisionist history".
In the case of hillary clinton, she revised history int he span of 5 minutes during her debate; and several times a few days later.

Posted by: So What | December 1, 2007 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Note: to be taken seriously, try to avoid "scare quotes".

One might say there is an inverse relationship between the number of "scare quotes" and the persuasiveness of the argument.

Posted by: Why y'all hatin' on statistics? | December 1, 2007 1:23 PM | Report abuse

GRAPH #1 proves Dinkins DID NOT do a good job. WHY? HERE's my interpretation:

If you look at graph #1 for NY in 1985 and compare it to NY in 1993/94 you will see that they are almost IDENTICAL.

1.)All Dinkins did was bring the crime rate back down to 1985 levels during the Ed Koch era. That's not something to brag about. Crime was out of control throughout the Koch era.

2.)What Dinkins did was NOT unprecedented; Ed Koch did it in 1985. And as previously mentioned, crime was out of control even during the Koch era. That's why the people of New York said "David do something" even though crime was going down (but just to Ed Koch levels of 1985 - New York was still a dump).

3.)The Guiliani years on the other hand showed a decline that broke-out of the "Koch pattern"; this is what makes Giuliani's reign unprecedented in NY - he went "BELOW the Koch level" (1985 Koch that is).

4.)David Dinkins was pressured to finally put more police DURING AN ELECTION YEAR (his last year in office); which contributed to the incredible downward trend starting in 1994.

5.)Giuliani was a part of the conservative revolution that happened across the country in 1993-1994.

6.)This so-called conservative revolution happened even in liberal cities like Los Angeles where laws and sentencing became tougher. Laws such as "Two strikes and your out". and a crack down on Juvenile crime.
Sure liberals where still in charge but they became more conservative with things like "three strikes and your out". Even Bill Clinton became more conservative signing more police on streets.

7.)There was an increase in the number of jails built in the United States around this time.

8.)Giuliani went after organized crime with a vengeance. The "good economy" did not put the mob in jail.

9.)The police and tougher laws and increase and prisons built are what contributed to the drop in crime in the 90s. Giuliani was a vocal and active leader in this conservative revolution against crime staring in 93-94.

Posted by: Dinkins and Koch sucked | December 2, 2007 6:41 PM | Report abuse

There is a correlation concerning William Bratton, former NYPD chief, who was fired by Giuliani, and replaced by his buddy, the corrpupt hack Kerick. Bratton seems to have a definite impact in Los Angeles, where he was hired as police chief.

Posted by: lwps | December 3, 2007 10:08 PM | Report abuse

I read an article that stated violent crime was down across all the cities in the world. The reason given was declining lead levels in the air!

Posted by: Anonymous | January 3, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company