There’s a saying in media, “If it bleeds, it leads.” This is a cynical reference to the notion that reporting on tragedy and victimization sells newspapers, or—in our modern media landscape—generates clicks. For my part, I would rather write about anything else, although sometimes it’s necessary to discuss the dynamics of violent crime to gain a fuller understanding of our right to keep and bear arms.
This month, however, there is good news to report on that topic. Homicide rates in the United States, including those where firearms are used, have been declining over the last few years. According to multiple reports on early projections, 2025 is expected to see the largest decline in homicides in the U.S. ever recorded, with some estimating a roughly 20% drop.
Much of the data on crime from last year still needs to be reported, compiled and analyzed, but what we are seeing preliminarily is quite promising. Real-Time Crime Index, an online project that follows crime trends, showed a 19.8% drop in murder when comparing January to October numbers from both 2024 and 2025. But it’s not just murder rates that are falling. Estimates are that all violent crime will show a decrease of around 9% in 2025, including a decline in rapes of about 6%, robbery 16% and aggravated assault around 8%.
As will always be the case, there will be debates over what has led to these reductions. Some will call it a “return to normal” after the national spike in crime during the COVID years. Others may point to the efforts of President Trump, who has made no secret of his desire to promote law and order in America.
Trump, of course, has been strictly enforcing our nation’s immigration laws, and we have seen a parade of violent criminals the previous administration allowed to illegally enter our country apprehended by federal agents and sent back to their home countries (or elsewhere when those countries also did not want them to return).
Our president also famously deployed the National Guard into areas where violence was rampant. Washington, D.C., for example, saw troops arrive in August of last year. I can tell you firsthand how reassuring it was to see these brave men and women when I was in the District, whether they were at Metro stations, in high-crime areas or simply walking the streets.
While reminding you of the old “correlation is not causation” axiom, I will note that just about every category of violent crime in D.C. looks like it will see a dramatic decline for 2025.
So, although it may be up for debate as to what has led to plummeting crime rates in the U.S., what is not up for debate is that this trend is another nail in the coffin for the anti-gun argument that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens leads to more crime.
The legal sale of firearms surged greatly during the COVID pandemic, and sales have remained robust. Lawrence Keane, the Senior Vice President and General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), wrote an article recently titled: “As Gun Ownership Surges, Murder Rates Fall.” Following the correlation versus causation caveat, Keane wrote:
This is not a claim that guns “cause” crime to fall. Crime is driven by offender behavior, enforcement, prosecution and local conditions. But it is a direct rebuttal to the overly simplistic gun control talking point that increases in lawful gun ownership will absolutely increase murder and firearm violence.
That’s not to say that I (or Keane, for that matter) don’t firmly believe firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens contribute to lowering violent crime rates. There is no doubt in my mind of the deterrent effect of armed citizens.
It’s difficult to quantify, however, why something did not happen.
On the other hand, year after year, anti-gun extremists proclaim that guns cause crime, and every time restrictions on law-abiding gun owners are eased, these same radicals start predicting the streets will now run red with the blood of innocent victims. It started back in 1987, when Florida began the trend of loosening restrictions on carrying firearms for self-defense. As more states followed suit, the cries of impending doom from those who despise our right to arms grew louder.
But they were wrong.
As our efforts transitioned from shall-issue carry permits to constitutional carry, and more than half the states passed laws no longer requiring a permit for a law-abiding citizen to carry a firearm for personal protection, those cries grew louder.
And they were wrong, again.
After the landmark decision in the Bruen case came down, striking may-issue permit laws, the cries were renewed. Keane’s article notes that, after Bruen, California’s notoriously anti-gun governor Gavin Newsom ridiculously proclaimed the decision would “return California to the days of the Wild West.”
Wrong again.
So, crime is down, and that should make everyone happy. But that’s not to say we should consider the mission accomplished. I remain convinced that loosening restrictions on law-abiding gun owners is a major contributor to the decline, so you can rest assured your NRA will continue to focus its efforts in that area.
That’s a promise.
