The ongoing debate about gun violence in the United States raises important questions about the role of community violence intervention (CVI) programs and gun control measures. While some argue that focusing on CVI or gun control is a zero-sum game, new evidence suggests that a combination of both approaches is essential in reducing gun violence.
Gun violence in major American cities has increased significantly over the past year, with murders rising by 30% in large cities and legal gun sales reaching all-time highs[1]. This stark reality has prompted calls for tougher criminal justice responses, as some wonder if anything other than "tough on crime" strategies will be effective. However, a closer look at the evidence reveals a more nuanced picture.
CVI programs like Operation Peacemaker have proven their worth in reducing violence through empirical evaluations and academic research[2]. By working with high-risk individuals and pursuing strategies tailored to specific communities, these programs build trust and deter violence before it occurs. The READI program in Chicago, which helped over 70% of participants who had been shot or arrested, witnessed a 40% decrease in the likelihood of its participants becoming gun violence or shooting victims[1].
However, gun violence is not solely an issue of community dynamics. Addressing the supply side of the problem, particularly illegal firearm distribution, is equally crucial. Gun control measures such as stricter background checks and waiting periods have been shown to yield positive results in reducing firearm fatalities[1]. Briefly touching upon enrichment insights, evidence reveals that universal background checks, background checks for ammunition sales, and identification requirements for guns are associated with reduced firearm mortality. Waiting periods that delay the purchase of firearms by a few days can reduce gun homicides and suicides by around 17% and 2-5%, respectively.
Furthermore, prohibiting guns to those with domestic violence restraining orders, violent misdemeanor convictions, or who fail permit-to-purchase inspections, have all been linked to lower violence rates. Child-access prevention laws, which restrict minors from handling firearms, have also proven successful in reducing firearm injuries and deaths among children[1].
Integrating CVI with regulatory gun control measures may offer a comprehensive solution to the issue. By addressing both the immediate causes of violence and broader societal factors, communities can construct a multifaceted strategy to reduce gun violence[1][2]. Moreover, both CVI and gun control policies should be informed by evidence. While CVI programs may thrive on qualitative and participatory methodologies, gun control legislation should be backed by rigorous scientific evidence.
To summarize, the debate on gun violence in America hinges on understanding the intersectional nature of the issue. Addressing the needs of at-risk communities and implementing stricter gun legislation can effectively reduce gun violence in the United States.
