In a recent analysis published in the New York Post, Professor John Lott, president of the acclaimed Crime Prevention Research Center, sharply critiques the way the Democratic Party and its allies in the media manipulate crime statistics to paint a misleading picture of safety under their leadership.

Lott points out that despite claims by prominent Democrats like Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg that crime went up under President Trump and fell under President Biden, the data tells a different story. Contrary to their assertions, violent crime actually fell by 17% during President Trump’s term, but soared by 43% under President Biden between 2020 and 2022. This stark reality is something that many media outlets and Democratic politicians seem keen to obscure. In fact, they outright lie about it it would appear.

The crux of Lott’s argument lies in the discrepancy between the two major crime data sources in the U.S.: the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The FBI data, which relies on crimes reported to police, shows a decline in violent crime since 2020. However, the NCVS, which surveys individuals directly about their experiences with crime, shows a dramatic increase in violent crime, with a staggering 42.4% rise in 2022 alone.

Lott highlights that this divergence is not just a statistical anomaly but reflects a deeper issue: the collapse of effective law enforcement across many American cities. For instance, arrest rates for reported violent crimes have plummeted, with cities like New York seeing a drop from 44% pre-pandemic to just 20% in 2022. This means that fewer criminals are being held accountable, not being arrested and charged in the first place, so it looks like crime is actually going down. This leads to a vicious cycle where victims increasingly believe there is no point in reporting crimes.

This breakdown in law enforcement is further exacerbated by the significant reduction in police staffing due to budget cuts, retirements and rampant demoralization of rank and file police officers in departments across the country following the “defund the police” movement, which many Democratic politicians, including Harris and Walz, supported. In some areas, police no longer respond to non-emergency calls, leaving victims to fend for themselves. Consequently, the FBI’s crime data, which relies on police reports, is becoming less reliable. There has also been a drop in police departments even reporting data to the FBI, which also accounts for less crime being counted. Meanwhile, the NCVS data paints a much more alarming picture of the true state of crime in the U.S.

Lott’s analysis warns that relying on the FBI’s data, as many Democratic officials do, conveniently downplays the severity of the crime problem. This selective use of data is a tactic to soft-pedal the reality of rising crime, allowing the Democratic Party to avoid accountability for the consequences of their policies. Even worse, it allows them to pedal progressive policies to an unwitting public; polices that actually make our communities less safe, such as releasing criminals and some illegals back on the streets.

Lott’s findings underscore the importance of scrutinizing the data and narratives pushed by those who seek to impose more restrictive gun laws, limit the effectiveness of our police departments and turn criminals loose on the streets to commit more crimes. The disconnect between reported crime and actual victimization serves as a reminder that protecting one’s right to self-defense is more critical than ever, especially in an environment where the government’s ability to ensure public safety is increasingly in question.

For the complete editorial by Lott, visit the New York Post.