Murder rate decrease
Executive summary
The United States appears on track in 2025 for a substantial decline in homicides—analysts report year‑to‑date drops around 15–20% and samples of 30 cities show a 17% fall in the first half of the year, which could produce the lowest national murder rate since the FBI began tracking in 1960 if trends hold [1] [2]. Local reports show big city-by-city variation: some cities report historic lows in murders and shootings while others remain well above pre‑pandemic baselines [3] [4].
1. Big picture: a national decline that could be record‑setting
Multiple analysts and outlets conclude 2025 is plausibly headed toward the lowest U.S. murder rate on record: a widely‑cited sample covering 116 million people found murders down about 20% through July, and back‑of‑the‑envelope projections of a 15–20% year‑over‑year drop would likely put 2025 below previous lows in the FBI series [1] [5]. Jeff Asher’s work and related writeups argue a decline of 10–20% this year would at minimum tie the 2014 low and could set a new low if current trajectories persist [6] [7].
2. City-level nuance: big gains, persistent pockets of violence
National averages mask sharp local differences. Council on Criminal Justice data for 30 cities show homicides were 17% lower in the first half of 2025, representing 327 fewer killings in that sample, yet the report also notes 10 of those cities still have higher homicide rates than in 2019 and variation across places remains large [2] [8]. Reporting from the Washington Post and local police dashboards confirms that while some cities (for example Denver, Chattanooga in CCJ’s sample) saw very large reductions, other cities continue to carry very high per‑capita homicide burdens [3] [2].
3. Why rates may be falling: competing explanations
Researchers offer several plausible drivers rather than a single cause. Some criminologists attribute declines to resumed government services, investments in jobs and violence‑prevention programs, and recovery from the pandemic disruption rather than changes in gun prevalence or policing levels; others point to local policy shifts and targeted interventions [9]. The Vera Institute cautions that political leaders who claim credit (for example linked to immigration enforcement) are not supported by the available analyses, which emphasize continuity with trends that began in 2023 and the role of prevention spending and local strategies [10] [9].
4. Data caveats: samples, revisions, and the FBI’s opaque process
All current claims rely heavily on partial samples, mid‑year snapshots, and analyst projections; the FBI’s final annual totals are often revised and the agency’s revision process has produced notable changes in prior years, meaning year‑end comparisons can shift once final data are released [1] [5]. Several analysts explicitly warn results are preliminary and could moderate if late‑year trends reverse, and local agencies report numbers differently (e.g., excluding justifiable homicides), affecting comparability [1] [11].
5. What the numbers mean for policy and politics
Observers from different perspectives draw divergent political lessons: some public‑safety advocates and analysts say the decline undermines alarmist narratives and credits investments in prevention, while conservative commentators and some officials have attempted to link rapid drops to enforcement actions—claims that organizations like the Vera Institute dispute and say are not supported by the data cited in public analyses [10] [9]. The reporting highlights that framing can reflect implicit agendas: analysts focused on data caution against quick causal claims; policy actors often use headline numbers to bolster competing narratives [9] [10].
6. What to watch next: indicators that will confirm or complicate the story
Key things to monitor are the FBI’s final 2025 homicide count and rate (subject to future revisions), sustained month‑to‑month trends through the end of the year, and whether drops persist across the full range of cities and demographic groups—reports so far show strong month‑to‑month decreases in some months (e.g., February and June) and continuing disparities in victimization [2] [10]. Local dashboards and city year‑end reports (e.g., New York, St. Louis) will add necessary granularity to national summaries [11] [4].
Limitations: available sources are preliminary analyses, mid‑year samples, city dashboards and analyst projections; they do not provide a finalized FBI 2025 national rate and do not converge on a single causal explanation—therefore assertions about exact causes or definitive national rankings should await full, revised federal data [1] [5].