Unforgiving Places

1. Conventional Wisdom Fails to Explain Most Gun Violence

Whatever you believe about the causes of gun violence in America, those beliefs almost surely fail to explain why Greater Grand Crossing would be so much more of a violent place than South Shore.

Limited explanations. For decades, America has relied on two primary narratives to explain gun violence: either it's caused by "wicked people" undeterred by the justice system, or it stems from deep-seated "root causes" like poverty and discrimination. Both perspectives assume rational, deliberate decision-making by offenders. However, these conventional wisdoms fall short in explaining critical patterns of violence.

Inconsistent with data. These theories struggle to account for why gun violence varies so dramatically across seemingly similar neighborhoods, like Greater Grand Crossing and South Shore in Chicago, which are adjacent, socio-demographically alike, and share the same justice system. They also fail to explain why violence peaks in late adolescence, is more common at night, on weekends, or in warmer months, as people's moral character or economic status don't fluctuate with age, time, or season.

Policy stagnation. The reliance on these incomplete explanations has led to ineffective policies. "Get tough" approaches have swelled prison populations without solving the core problem, while efforts to address "root causes" often prove too complex and politically challenging to implement at scale. This stagnation perpetuates a cycle of pain and loss, highlighting the urgent need for a new understanding of gun violence.

2. Gun Violence is a "Guns Plus Violence" Problem

It’s the combination of lots of guns and lots of violence that’s catastrophic.

Beyond gun numbers. While the U.S. has an exceptionally high number of guns (400 million for 330 million people) and a murder rate five times that of the UK, simply blaming guns is insufficient. Countries like Canada and Switzerland have high gun ownership but low murder rates, demonstrating that guns alone aren't catastrophic. Conversely, the UK has high rates of violent crime but low murder rates due to strict gun control.

Two pathways to solutions. The problem is best understood as "Gun violence = guns + violence." This formula implies two distinct avenues for intervention: reducing gun availability or reducing the propensity for violence. Given the political paralysis and constitutional challenges surrounding gun control in the U.S., focusing solely on guns is a risky, undiversified strategy.

Limited gun control impact. Decades of U.S. gun legislation, from the 1934 National Firearms Act to the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, have had modest overall effects on gun violence. This is largely because most laws fail to regulate the vast "secondary gun market" of private sales, allowing illegal guns to flow easily across state and city lines, undermining local restrictions.

3. Most Shootings Stem from Arguments, Not Psychopathy or Profit

Most gun violence victims lose their lives as part of the daily tragedies that typically don’t make news headlines—what the mayor of Milwaukee once referred to as “slow-motion mass murder.”

Misleading media narratives. News and entertainment media often sensationalize gun violence, focusing on rare, extreme cases like serial killers or large-scale gang wars over drug turf. This creates a public perception that most shootings are premeditated acts by psychopaths or economically motivated criminals. However, data reveals a different reality.

Mundane motivations. In Chicago, police data indicate that 70-80% of murders with a known motive stem from arguments or interpersonal conflicts, not profit-driven crime. Robberies account for less than 10% of murders, and gang wars over drug turf for only about 9%. These are "crimes of passion" or "expressive violence," often triggered by perceived disrespect or slights, rather than instrumental goals.

Universal susceptibility. This means most gun violence isn't committed by a distinct class of "wicked people" but by "normal people" caught in escalating conflicts. As one Chicago street outreach worker noted, "All that shit’s that taking place right now ain’t even gang related. It’s personal stuff." This shifts the focus from inherent evil to the dynamics of human interaction and the situations in which they occur.

4. Human Behavior is "Boundedly Rational": System 1 vs. System 2

But a key lesson from behavioral economics over the past fifty years is that we are all, in a sense, of two minds.

Two modes of thought. Behavioral economics reveals that human decision-making operates through two systems:

• System 1: Fast, automatic, intuitive, subconscious, and effortless. It handles routine tasks and quickly forms impressions.
• System 2: Slow, deliberate, conscious, and effortful. It's our analytical, rational side, used for complex problem-solving and self-control.

Cognitive miser. Our brains are "cognitive misers," preferring System 1 to conserve energy, as System 2 is mentally taxing. This reliance on System 1 is adaptive for daily routines but can lead to predictable errors when faced with novel, difficult, or high-stakes situations where careful deliberation is needed.

Invisible influence. System 1 operates below conscious awareness, making its influence on our thoughts and actions often invisible. We may not realize the implicit assumptions or shortcuts it takes, leading to "thinking past" critical details. This explains why people can be surprised by their own impulsive behaviors, like swearing in front of a child or escalating a minor argument.

5. System 1 Errors Drive Many High-Stakes Conflicts

Most violent crimes are the result of human behavior gone temporarily haywire, not premeditated acts for financial benefit.

SODAS framework. In social interactions, our minds quickly navigate a series of steps: Situation, Objectives, Disadvantages, Advantages, and Solutions (SODAS). System 1 can make errors at any of these steps, especially under stress or in novel situations.

• Misconstruing situations: Egocentric construal (assuming others' intentions are about us), fundamental attribution error (blaming person, not situation), motivated reasoning (seeing what we want to see).
• Flawed objectives: Confusing wants with needs, catastrophizing (exaggerating negative outcomes).
• Poor solutions: Dichotomous thinking (only two options), omission neglect (ignoring unseen options), impulsive action (skipping consequences).

Fleeting motivations. Unlike persistent, rational motivations, System 1-driven impulses are often fleeting. An argument over a used car or a perceived slight can escalate rapidly if System 1 takes over, leading to actions that System 2 would later regret. The presence of a gun in such a "ten-minute window" of conflict can turn a regrettable mistake into a life-altering tragedy.

Universal susceptibility. My own experiences—from road rage to a fistfight over a Nerf football—illustrate how easily System 1 can lead anyone astray in stressful moments. These aren't signs of inherent bad character but rather universal human frailties in challenging circumstances, highlighting that gun violence is often a problem of "human cognition in the wrong gear."

6. "Unforgiving Places" Exacerbate System 1 Mistakes

Criminal behavior, even gun violence, is human behavior. Most violence stems from a remarkably common way human beings interact with one another: conflict.

Environmental influence. The behavioral economics perspective explains why gun violence varies so dramatically across neighborhoods, even those that are socio-demographically similar. Some places are "unforgiving" of System 1's frailties, making it harder for individuals to navigate high-stakes social interactions without making costly errors.

Wicked learning environments. Neighborhoods with low "informal social control" (lack of "eyes on the street" or collective efficacy) create "wicked learning environments." These are unpredictable settings where:

• Feedback is costly: Zero-tolerance policing or lack of community intervention makes it hard to learn adaptive responses.
• Bandwidth is depleted: High stress and trauma (e.g., from premature deaths) reduce mental capacity, increasing reliance on System 1.
• Self-help is prioritized: Residents learn to "fight back hard" to deter future victimization, escalating minor conflicts.

Greater Grand Crossing vs. South Shore. The stark difference in shooting rates between these two Chicago neighborhoods, despite their similarities, is attributed to Greater Grand Crossing being a more unforgiving place. It has:

• Fewer "eyes on the street" due to less dense, mixed-use development.
• Higher rates of misdemeanor arrests, indicating costlier feedback.
• Higher levels of stress and trauma, depleting mental bandwidth.

These factors collectively increase the likelihood of System 1 errors escalating into violence.

7. Informal Social Control Prevents Violence by Interrupting System 1 Errors

That man did not know it, but he was surrounded. Nobody was going to allow a little girl to be dragged off, even if nobody knew who she was.

The power of "eyes on the street." Jane Jacobs's concept of "eyes on the street"—neighbors and local businesses actively monitoring and intervening in public spaces—is crucial for public safety. This informal social control, or "collective efficacy," creates a "kind learning environment" where conflicts are more likely to be interrupted before they escalate.

Violence interrupted is violence prevented. Unlike conventional wisdom, which assumes persistent criminal intent, behavioral economics suggests that System 1-driven motivations are fleeting. An interruption during a "ten-minute window" of conflict allows System 2 to engage, emotions to subside, and individuals to reconsider their actions, preventing violence rather than merely delaying it.

Evidence from environmental design. Rigorous studies support this:

• Business closures: Closing marijuana dispensaries in LA, which reduced foot traffic, led to a 20% increase in crime, including violent crime.
• Street lighting: Randomly adding streetlights to public housing developments in NYC reduced serious offenses by 35%.
• Vacant lot cleanup: Transforming blighted vacant lots into green spaces in Philadelphia reduced gun assaults by 10% in lower-income areas.
• Abandoned homes: Fixing up abandoned houses in Philadelphia reduced shootings by 9%.

These interventions, which increase "eyes on the street" and improve informal social control, reduce violence without addressing traditional "root causes" or deterrence.

8. Targeted Interventions Can Train "Self-Interruption" and Reduce Violence

The program’s overall goal, in other words, is to help young people better understand how their own minds work as they’re navigating difficult, fraught situations out in the real world.

Beyond external control. While "eyes on the street" provide external interruption, behavioral economics also supports interventions that teach individuals to "self-interrupt" their System 1 impulses. Programs like Becoming a Man (BAM) and Choose 2 Change (C2C) help young people recognize high-stakes situations and engage their System 2 thinking.

Behavioral skills training. These programs use exercises and role-playing to:

• Reframe situations: "The Fist" exercise helps participants see how they misinterpret others' intentions.
• Question objectives: Counselors prompt reflection on whether a perceived slight is truly worth escalating.
• Consider alternatives: Encouraging "stop, look, and listen" strategies to slow down impulsive reactions.
• Increase self-awareness: Daily check-ins on physical, intellectual, emotional, and spiritual states (PIES).

Remarkable results. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these programs show significant reductions in violence:

• BAM: Reduced violent-crime arrests by nearly 50% and increased high school graduation rates by 20%.
• C2C: Reduced violent-crime arrests by about 50% in the short term, with persistent effects.
• READI (with "CAD" component): Showed an estimated 65% reduction in shooting arrests for high-risk young men.

These programs achieve substantial violence reduction without directly addressing poverty, morality, or punishment, proving the power of targeting System 1 errors.

9. Reducing Gun Carrying Prevents System 1 Mistakes from Turning Lethal

It’s not that a gun causes altercations, but placing a gun into the middle of an argument greatly increases the chances someone winds up dead.

Guns as amplifiers. The presence of a gun during a "ten-minute window" of conflict dramatically increases the likelihood of a fatal outcome. A gun in public is far more dangerous than one stored at home, as it's readily available when System 1 errors lead to impulsive, regrettable actions.

The "arms race" of carrying. In areas with low social control, individuals may carry guns for self-protection, fearing others are also armed—a self-reinforcing "arms race." This decision is often driven by System 1's availability heuristic, overestimating the prevalence of guns and the necessity of carrying one.

Impact of reducing carrying. Data from Chicago suggests that a 50% increase in illegal gun carrying could roughly double the number of shootings. Conversely, policies that reduce gun carrying, whether through law enforcement efforts or behavioral interventions, can prevent System 1 mistakes from turning lethal. This is because the motivation for violence is often fleeting; if a gun isn't immediately available, the opportunity for a fatal error may pass.

Behavioral economics supports gun control. This perspective provides a strong rationale for gun control measures, particularly those that make it harder to carry guns in public. Unlike conventional wisdom, which might see such measures as merely delaying persistent criminal intent, behavioral economics highlights how reducing gun availability during impulsive moments can prevent violence altogether.

10. Behavioral Economics Offers a Unified Theory for Diverse Solutions

Behavioral economics provides the equivalent of the underlying explanatory theory of gun violence—a unifying explanation that makes everything else make sense.

Consilience of ideas. Historically, various fields have proposed disparate solutions to gun violence, from urban planning to public health to education. Behavioral economics offers a "meta-explanation" that unifies these seemingly unrelated approaches, providing a coherent framework for understanding why they work.

Connecting the dots:

• Public health: Views violence as a "disease" but lacks a mechanism; BE explains it as a decision-making malfunction.
• Urban planning: Jane Jacobs's "eyes on the street" makes sense as a System 1 interruption mechanism.
• Community Violence Intervention (CVI): "Credible messengers" de-escalate conflicts by engaging System 2 reflection.
• Restorative justice: Works by prompting offenders to reflect on their actions and alternative choices.
• Gun control: Effective because it removes the lethal tool during fleeting, impulsive System 1 moments.

Beyond a "random grab-bag." Without this unifying theory, these interventions appear as a disconnected list of tactics. Behavioral economics provides the "germ theory" for gun violence, explaining why these diverse strategies are effective by addressing the common underlying mechanism of System 1 errors in high-stakes situations.

11. Behavioral Insights Can Improve the Criminal Justice System

Behavioral economics doesn’t just steer us toward new things to try—everything listed above—but it can also help make the things we’ve already been trying work much better.

Enhancing deterrence. While System 1-driven individuals are less deterrable by traditional punishments, behavioral-economics programs make people more reflective and thus more responsive to incentives. By helping individuals engage System 2, these programs indirectly enhance deterrence, leading to less violence and potentially less incarceration.

Preventive policing. Police officers, often acting as "street corner politicians," can prevent violence by mediating conflicts and problem-solving. RCTs show that police engaging in problem-oriented activities, rather than just "presence" or arrests, can increase crime prevention by up to 60%. Behavioral training for police, like that developed with LAPD and Chicago PD, reduced non-lethal force by 23% and Black-white disparities in arrests.

Optimizing rehabilitation. Jails and prisons can integrate low-cost behavioral-economics programming, such as "reflective journaling" or "Great Books" discussions, to help inmates develop metacognition. An RCT at the Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center, for example, reduced recidivism by 20% by having staff deliver such programming during downtime. This shifts focus from punitive incapacitation to fostering self-reflection and better decision-making.

Complementary, not substitutive. Behavioral economics doesn't replace the criminal justice system but makes it more effective and humane. By reducing the volume of System 1-driven violence, it allows the justice system to focus better on the most serious cases, while also making its deterrent and rehabilitative efforts more impactful.

12. Solving Gun Violence Unlocks Broader Societal Progress

If gun violence, uncontrolled, is a challenging headwind for economic development, safety is a massive tailwind.

Breaking vicious cycles. Gun violence creates a vicious cycle: it traumatizes communities, hinders children's education, drives away residents and businesses, and undermines economic development. This depletes resources needed to address underlying social problems, perpetuating violence. Cities like Detroit exemplify this, losing two-thirds of their population since 1950 amidst high murder rates.

Creating virtuous cycles. Conversely, reducing gun violence can initiate a virtuous cycle. As public safety improves, people and businesses return, boosting economic activity and strengthening a city's fiscal capacity. New York City's dramatic 90% drop in murder rates from 1991-2019 coincided with population growth and economic revitalization, demonstrating that progress is possible.

A progressive agenda. The behavioral economics approach offers a path to address gun violence that aligns with diverse political preferences. It provides multiple avenues for intervention—from community-led initiatives to police reform and educational changes—allowing cities to tailor strategies to their unique contexts. This approach is inherently progressive, as the benefits of reduced violence disproportionately accrue to the most disadvantaged communities.

Hope for a forgiving country. By understanding gun violence as a problem of fallible human beings making System 1 mistakes in difficult situations, we can move beyond despair and endless debates. Investing in "forgiving places" and equipping individuals with better decision-making skills offers a powerful, evidence-based strategy to create a safer, more equitable, and more prosperous future for all Americans.

Last updated: December 6, 2025