The “clearances paradox”: Could fewer police officers in New York actually lower gun violence?

James Essig, the chief of detectives for the New York City police department, approached the stage to describe how the NYPD had solved a crime.

Eric Adams has established controversial new units and is catching more low-level offenders, but addressing the most violent crimes could restore public confidence.

On 9 January 2022, shortly after midnight, Kristal Bayron Nieves, 19, was shot and killed during a botched heist at the East Harlem Burger King where she had just started working.

The surveillance camera captured an individual wearing a ski mask. A set of white earbuds dangling from his pocket provided an additional vital hint, however, it did not reveal his face.

Using more security footage from the street and the public transportation system, police tracked and identified a man wearing different clothing but with a similar walk, height, and build, as well as white earbuds dangling from his side. He was arrested and charged with murder in Brooklyn.

Despite the media attention and police acclaim, the case was notable for being an outlier. The majority of shootings in New York City remain unsolved, leaving families and communities without closure and explanations.

In 2021, only 54 percent of homicides resulted in an arrest, according to Vital City, a Columbia Law School magazine focusing on public safety. The rate of nonfatal shootings in New York City was considerably lower last year, at 35%.

This number is known as the clearance rate in law enforcement, and it has decreased in recent years. In 2017, the NYPD solved 76% of homicides and 50% of non-fatal gunshot incidents. As a result of the Covid-19 outbreak, however, shootings increased across the nation, and clearance rates decreased.

After the police deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others, some public safety and law enforcement experts attribute this reduction in part to a lack of trust in the criminal justice system, particularly in Black communities.

As the new “tough on crime” mayor, Eric Adams, responds to the crisis by launching a much-touted crackdown, pouring more money into the police, and creating special new units to arrest low-level offenders, a new theory is gaining traction among experts: could the strategy of simply making more arrests backfire – and make crime worse?

Or, instead, may fewer arrests decrease crime?

The issue of excessive policing
The ability of law enforcement to solve a crime, particularly a deadly shooting, is dependent on the relationship between a community and its police officers. People who have information about a significantly violent crime often choose not to come forward.

Police and politicians frequently blame a “no-snitch” attitude, but some argue the issue is more complex.

Without relationships, you cannot solve these murders,” said Corey Pegues, a former NYPD precinct commander, and executive. Nobody wants to talk, especially in a neighborhood where relations with the police are strained.

It is a vicious cycle: when fewer individuals collaborate, the police are less likely to close cases. Moreover, when the police close fewer cases, individuals are less inclined to cooperate.

Elizabeth Glazer, a public safety expert and the former director of the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice and founder of the Vital City journal, stated, “If you call the police and they don’t come or they come late, or if you call the police and they’re unable to solve the shooting and you’ve exposed yourself, you won’t make that your first instinct anymore.”

As the crime rate skyrocketed this year, Adams and the NYPD increased enforcement. Police claim that low-level quality of life offenses such as fare-beating, public drinking, and gambling is linked to serious crime. Adams’s decision to reintroduce contentious anti-crime troops, dissolved following the Floyd riots and renamed Neighborhood Safety Teams and charged with removing firearms from the streets, was another.

According to the mayor’s office of criminal justice, the NYPD has been making more arrests since then, but primarily for non-violent offenses. Even the anti-gun section primarily makes arrests for minor infractions such as fake ID possession.

In the near run, raising (or decreasing) the enforcement of non-violent offenses has little to no influence on crime rates, according to research. Long-term, however, an increase in arrests for non-violent and low-level offenses may have the reverse impact of what authorities seek.

Anna Harvey, a professor at New York University and head of the Public Safety Lab, stated that arrests “set off a chain of events that, in most circumstances, leave individuals with lifelong criminal records, even if they are ultimately exonerated.”

Minor breaches frequently result in the loss of employment and make it difficult to locate and maintain accommodation. The introduction of individuals to the criminal justice system raises the risk that they will re-offend.

Moreover, harsh enforcement strategies can harm community ties. According to an analysis by FiveThirtyEight, cities with more low-level arrests do not have lower crime rates, but they do tend to have more police shootings. Some fear that with the NYPD’s new measures, police brutality is likely to continue, eroding the gains made thus far.

“There will be another Eric Garner, Sean Bell, or Omar Edwards,” warned Pegues, referring to slayings involving plainclothes troops. “As soon as a police officer shoots an unarmed civilian for the first time, you will lose all of your gains. You are responsible for bringing this back. You are at fault. It is not going to look well.”

Pegues stated that arresting people for minor offenses or putting them in jeopardy by questioning them in public – which could make them a target for retaliation – can make it more difficult to clear cases.

The public advocate of New York City, Jumaane Williams, stated, “Communities are caught between very genuine street violence and over-policing.” “What they want most is for their tax dollars to fund transparent policing, but they also want their money to help them feel protected.” And that has not occurred.”

Unprotected by law enforcement and penalized for carrying a weapon
There is one notable exception to the paradox of increased arrests, however: when shootings remain unsolved. According to a review of evidence by University of Pennsylvania criminologist Anthony Braga, in marginalized neighborhoods with pervasive gun violence, unsolved shootings foster assumptions that police do not care about Black and brown victims.

Braga said in a July 2021 report, “Trust in the police erodes, diminishing the willingness of community members to offer information about suspected shooters.”

Young people are more prone to carry firearms in communities with greater rates of violence, especially if they do not trust the police to be impartial, according to studies.

It is the same in New York City. The pervasiveness and unpredictability of violence was the primary driver of gun-carrying, according to a report by the Center for Court Innovation, which was based on interviews with 330 young people, ages 16 to 24, who lived in neighborhoods with high gun violence rates. The majority of these young people were Black and Latino. The absence of police protection and the dread of being shot by cops also contributed.

“The idea of being caught in a double bind – unprotected by police from other gun users and penalized for carrying to protect themselves – was a prominent theme in the tales of young people,” the survey noted.

“Many individuals mistrust the police because ‘the police are fast to harass me, but not always quick to protect me when I need them,'” said the director of community-based violence prevention at the center, Haley Nolasco. “Many people carry firearms for these reasons.”

The same perception of risk pushed them to join gangs. The gangs offered security, according to the interviewees, even though joining raises the likelihood of being attacked by other gangs or becoming a perpetrator of gun violence themselves.

Even in New York, where the police department has a budget of more than $11 billion, municipal politicians must decide where to allocate the funds. Given a choice between arresting minor offenders and resolving violent crime, experts recommend that the police prioritize the latter.

Improving shooting clearance rates is a “canary in the coal mine,” according to Glazer. Research indicates that by demonstrating that community people can rely on the police to administer justice, it is possible to increase confidence in the criminal justice system and prevent more violence.

Braga noted in his 2021 evaluation, “An effective investigation of shootings can assist prevent new cascades of gun violence in cities by discouraging retribution and incapacitating violent individuals who may persevere in their activities or become victims of retaliatory shootings.”

Braga concluded, based on a successful attempt in Boston to increase clearance rates, that breaking this loop requires investment in greater investigative resources, investigations that continue beyond the first several days after a shooting, and enhanced oversight.

The NYPD has taken some of these measures, including adding more officers to its gun violence suppression division, which focuses on shooting investigations, and requiring all detectives to use fundamental investigative techniques, such as canvassing, interviewing witnesses and victims, and collecting evidence at the scene of a crime.

However, more cops have been added to the relaunched anti-crime squads, which are only responsible for removing firearms from the streets and not for determining why people carry firearms in the first place.

“It all comes down to what police should be focusing on,” Harvey said. “It’s not the number of arrests they’ve made, but the number of gun crimes committed.” And ideally, they would like to see a decline in gun offenses while making as few arrests as possible to avoid collateral consequences.

“The cops do not establish trust through basketball games, cleanups, or other activities,” Glazer added.

By doubling down on efforts to solve the cases, building them one by one, and gaining the trust of victims and locals, one by one.

Eric Adams has established contentious new teams and is arresting individuals for minor infractions; nevertheless, solving more violent crimes will help re-establish public trust.