Is Bratton turning up the volume?

I haven't checked back to compare his past talk, but it feels like LAPD Chief William Bratton has been cranking up the rhetoric. In his latest monthly missive on the state of the city, he takes on "researchers, academics, and sociologists" who believe that crime waves have socio-economic roots and dismisses their "sterile and controlled academic and research environments." He's got a good point that cops matter — a lot — but isn't going after the eggheads just a little Gatesian?

I recently delivered a keynote speech at the annual National Institute of Justice Conference in Washington, DC. This gave me a chance to speak frankly about my beliefs on the factors involved in controlling and reducing crime, and my observations regarding the relationship between the practitioners—the cops on the street—and the researchers, academics, and sociologists.

Because the audience included researchers and social scientists, as well as police professionals, I challenged them all to begin working together in a more synergistic manner than in the antagonistic manner we have shared in the past. But the main point that I wanted to make was that cops count, and that cops are the most essential component of the equation when it comes to fighting and reducing crime.

In my remarks I spoke about the importance of debate and the exchange of opposing ideas. But I made it clear that I stop short when I hear the contentious opinion, commonly put forth by researchers, that fluctuations in crime are due to socioeconomic factors, such as demographics and economic disparity, while dismissing the role of police officers in crime prevention and reduction.

The City of Los Angeles is now experiencing its lowest crime numbers in 50 years, earning L.A. the title of second safest large city in the nation. That was not caused by some demographic or socioeconomic glitch or downward trend. It was in direct response to the hard work of the men and women of the LAPD.

He offers no hard evidence for that, and even contradicts it slightly when he notes that L.A. remains vastly underpoliced — yet still insists the department is responsible for the drop in crime. Not any of the demographic or economic influences that are nudging down crime other places are a factor here? Anyway, today's year-to-date crime stats are not as rosy. Since robberies are up so much, overall violent crime is down just 1.2% — not counting last weekend's surge in murders. As noted in the Morning Buzz, murder rates are up sharply in the Valley and Westside. Using the chief's logic, is the resurgence of crime there the result of insufficient police work? That seems too simple.

More chief after the jump: