New York Subway Safety Debate: Crime Trends, Policy Moves, and Community Critics

Not just Frank James’ clumsy attempt, but a jammed pistol kept the deadly attack from reaching its horrific end, leaving 10 people wounded on a New York subway car on Tuesday. Terror and fear are not measured only by deaths.

An incident without direct precedent in New York subway history has intensified worries about violence and guncrime. The trend has tracked upward since the pandemic began, affecting major U.S. cities. It is not that New York became the most violent city, but the scale of recent incidents in this once famously protected metropolis has grown noticeably.

Data and surveillance analysis, when examined closely, suggest security in the city has faltered. While far from the violent peaks of the 1980s and 1990s, a public Quinnipiac University survey shows less than half of New Yorkers feel safe riding the subway. About three-quarters view crime as a very serious problem, marking the highest concern since the survey first asked the question in 1999.

Rebuilding real and perceived safety remains the central objective. Eric Adams, a former police officer who campaigned on law and order, now leads the city. Yet his proposals, though centered on boosting police response, have sparked ongoing debate and scrutiny rather than broad agreement.

Data

In the first 100 days of his tenure, reports documented by the New York Police Department show a sharp rise in crime. Robberies increased by nearly 50 percent, rapes rose by 17 percent, and firearm incidents were up 8.4 percent compared with the same period a year earlier.

On public transit, the deterioration was even clearer. By April 10, just before the shooting, the situation had escalated by more than 68 percent. The case of a 40-year-old woman who died after being pushed onto the tracks by a homeless man with mental health struggles drew particular attention and concern.

Actions of the mayor

Just nine days before the attack, Adams and New York Governor Kathy Hochul spoke of a sustained police presence in the subway, a vital artery of city life where weekday ridership remained well below pre-pandemic levels. Thousands of officers joined patrols and roughly 10,000 surveillance cameras were installed across the system. Some cameras were not functioning on Tuesday, and patrols near the 36th Street station in Brooklyn did not prevent the incident.

In February, Adams and Hochul unveiled another plan aimed at removing nearly a thousand vulnerable individuals from stations and trains where they sought shelter. The mayor also expanded anti-gun units and restarted efforts to curb petty crimes seen as affecting quality of life. Critics trace echoes to the so-called broken-windows approach used in past policing strategies, which some credited with reducing crime but others say unfairly targeted minority communities and strained civil liberties.

Comments

The mayor’s security push received cautious approval from some observers. Richard Aborn, who chairs the Citizen Crime Commission, suggested Adams acted decisively. Yet many progressives, advocates for the homeless, and activist groups voiced strong opposition.

Angel Diazis, a lawyer and UCLA lecturer who studies technology and civil rights, argues that more police funding may not stop attacks and could harm daily subway users. He notes that New York already has one of the most extensive surveillance networks and that spending more to train and empower communities would likely yield better outcomes for neighborhoods that rely on transit every day.

Alex Life, a sociology professor at Brooklyn College, warns that increasing arrests tends to criminalize vulnerable populations and could deepen social fractures. He questions whether moving the homeless into more controlled spaces effectively addresses safety and emphasizes the city’s responsibility to provide basic services. He argues that policing alone cannot fix underlying issues.

The mayor defends his plan as a combination of police work and community-based programs, but critics highlight a budget imbalance. They point to a large share of resources directed to policing while funding for community initiatives remains relatively low. Supporters say a tougher, smarter approach is needed, while opponents worry about civil liberties and the potential for overreach.

Some observers suggest new models where civilians and trained responders tackle emergencies, reserving officers for true crises. Diaz counters that even tested and funded community solutions have not yet proven themselves under real stress and deserve careful evaluation before widespread deployment.