Is the 'Los Angeles' you're using in your comparisons counting 'Los Angeles' the actual named city or does it count the entire greater LA Basin, including Simi Valley and outlying places like Woodland Hills all the way to Long Beach and Pomona?
I ask because 'Long Beach' has it's own unique data pile. So does Pomona, and Culver City, and Compton, and Hawthorne, and Beverly Hills, and Inglewood, and so on. To me, all of those together are 'Los Angeles'.
If those areas are not being counted in your data, that would mean that you're only showing data from the downtown area of Los Angeles City *proper* and a tiny part of East Los Angeles that have the ZIP code they commonly share -- typically nothing but a financial business district that people commute to for a day's work and then leave for their homes in the greater LA area when the workday concludes. Do you really think that 'Los Angeles City' a skyscraper field that has almost no residential zoning to it and is almost empty of people after work hours is a fair comparison?
I just did some random comparisons against 'Los Angeles' and some places I know are sleepy Western US cities and using your comparison it falsely appears that 'Los Angeles' is as safe and peaceful as Tyrolian Austria.
You know, gosh sakes, you wouldn't be trying to pull a fast one on all the people here, would you? :)
I say this as a former decade-long resident of West Los Angeles proper and a suburbanite resident of the greater LA area who spent half of my life there.
LOL, look it up, the stats are no secret and can be found at the link.