Tutunjian said the numbers are the result of aggressive, proactive police work and pointed to a recent checkpoint that led to the seizure of drugs and weapons. "The numbers are there because you make arrests and you take guns off the streets and that results in a perceived increase in crime," Tutunjian said. "If we did not have that checkpoint set up, there would not have been a crime committed." - The Record 7/20/07.
As the Geico Caveman* would say: "What?"
Violent crime has risen under his regime because of aggressive, proactive police work - So, aggressive police work results in a rise in violent crime? Doesn't aggressive police work result in more arrests for violent crime? If there are more arrests for violent crime doesn't it follow that there is more violent crime? Or is Harry saying that the police didn't bother to make arrests before his inspired mayoralty?
The numbers are there because you make arrests - That would be true if every violent crime resulted in an arrest. The numbers are there because of reported incidents of violent crime, not merely arrests. Violent crimes do not always lead to an arrest. Furthermore, if you take guns off the street before they are used, the violent crime rate should drop, not rise. Has the Mayor thought this through or does he just parrot nonsense when on the defensive?
No checkpoint =no crime committed - This is the "If a tree falls in the woods" theory of crime. If someone transports illegal guns and drugs it's a crime whether there's a checkpoint or not. Under this novel theory, if someone commits murder and there is no arrest, there is no murder. That's one way to get the crime rate down. You could also decriminalize rape and robbery. That would lower the crime rate as well.
This daring, revolutionary crime theory is a boon to crime-plagued municipalities everywhere. It means that when official, New York State crime rate statistics show a rise in crime, there is actually a drop in crime. Correspondingly, a drop in the crime rate would mean a rise in crime. If the crime rate remains flat, it means that the same fifteen people are being repeatedly arrested for the same crime (there remains a difference of opinion on that point). What Harry is actually suggesting is that crime=arrest and arrest=crime and you cannot have one without the other and always the twain shall meet. Ultimately, abolishing the police department would reduce arrests to 0 and there would be no more crime. And Oceania is at war with Eurasia and has always been at war with Eurasia.
All this doesn't really matter, however, because as the Mayor previously pointed out, "statistics don't matter, results matter."**
The Democratic candidate for mayor, Jim Conroy, concedes that a 25% rise in crime is too high. Harry argues that the 25% increase actually represents a drop in crime. Perhaps they can reach a compromise and agree to a 12.5% increase in violent crime by 2009. It's a pledge both candidates can probably keep.
* We do not compare the Mayor's intellect to that of a caveperson. We admit that the Mayor's intellect exceeds that of a caveperson.
** This statement is supported by recent statistics