Is London a terrible and dangerous place?
Executive summary
London is not, on current evidence, a uniformly “terrible and dangerous” city: its homicide rate fell in 2025 to the lowest in more than a decade and is lower than that of most large U.S. cities, a trend London officials and the Metropolitan Police credit to targeted policing and violence‑reduction work [1] [2] [3]. That said, crime is uneven across neighbourhoods, some categories of offending remain a concern in recent years, and political narratives on both the left and right shape public perceptions of safety [4] [5] [6].
1. Why the headline numbers say “safer” — the homicide fall and its drivers
Official figures show London recorded 97 murders in 2025, a level described as the second lowest on record and the lowest homicide rate in more than a decade, a result that the mayor’s Violence Reduction Unit and the Met attribute to a mix of enforcement, prevention and technology such as live facial recognition and targeted operations against organised crime [6] [7] [3].
2. How London compares to other big cities — context matters
Comparisons published by international and national outlets note that London’s homicide rate is below that of nearly every large U.S. city cited, with New York, Los Angeles and Chicago having higher per‑capita homicide rates in recent data, undercutting claims that London is uniquely dangerous in a western context [2] [8].
3. The other side of the ledger — rising recorded offences and local variation
While homicides have fallen, overall recorded crime and certain categories have been higher than earlier in the decade: aggregated police figures showed spikes in offences through the mid‑2010s and substantial totals in 2023/24, and regional data indicate violent crime still represents a significant share of offences, with substantial variation between boroughs and neighbourhoods [5] [9] [4].
4. Perception versus reality — politics, media and the story people tell
Political actors, sensational headlines and social media have amplified fears — with high‑profile attacks and repeated statements from figures on the populist right portraying London as lawless — even as senior police and the mayor argue the data tell a different story; commentators note a persistent disconnect between falling homicide risk and public perception of danger [2] [1] [8].
5. The human cost and why “not terrible” is not the same as “problem solved”
Officials and campaigners stress that every homicide matters and that reductions do not negate persistent harms: the mayor highlights sharp falls in youth homicide and hospital admissions for knife assault since his VRU was set up, but he and campaigners warn against complacency and point to the need for continued work on poverty, exploitation and county‑lines gangs [10] [6] [3].
6. Trade‑offs and contested tools — policing, technology and civil liberties
Credit for falling murder figures has been partly claimed for intensified policing tactics and technologies — the Met cites more arrests, disruptions of organised crime and deployment of live facial recognition — but such methods are politically contested and raise civil‑liberties considerations that shape debate about what “safer” should cost [3] [11] [7].
Conclusion: a measured verdict
London in 2026 cannot fairly be labelled a city-wide “terrible and dangerous” place: its recorded homicide rate is at historic lows and comparative data place it among the safer large western capitals, yet crime patterns are uneven, some offence categories and areas remain problematic, and political narratives inflate fear; the picture is cautiously positive but incomplete, requiring ongoing policing, prevention and scrutiny of tactics [1] [2] [5].