That's a bit reductive. It can be true that globally (or in some superset) crime has decreased while in some local context it remains the same or has become concentrated (e.g. worse for people in that context).
This whole article and commentary around it has also highlighted another issue for me: It's hard to have nuanced conversations about complex problems that can be simplified or generalized to something causes a difference in perception about what actual problems *are*.
In many metro areas crime is higher than it was before COVID. Sure the levels may be decreasing below the 2020 peak levels, but relative to 2019 or earlier its oftentimes still higher.
Many many interesting points of information are lost when averages are taken. Averages can lie. If some working class people objectively feel their lives have worsened from crime, it's "progressives" in particular who need to be listening even if some of the facts appear to be wrong. It's quite possible critical theorists and sociologists and various experts are missing some important variance.
When people say crime is getting out of hand, while it's actually decreasing, all it means is that apparently the trends of average rate of crime doesn't match the trends of the particular types of crime or the location that actually impacts their group.
And it was also unreported before. It isn’t a new phenomenon. Do you like it better with “The reported crime rate has been decreased over a long enough period”?
