"Forget new gun laws. Here’s what could really keep people from shooting each other."

[TeddyR]

While they grab attention, justifiably, mass shootings remain outliers. Two-thirds of gun deaths are suicides. The tyranny of everyday shootings — the 12,000 homicides a year that happen so regularly that some people don’t even call 911 anymore — follow patterns completely divorced from the weapons used. These shootings have much more to do with the realities of life for the poor, the drug-addicted, the mentally ill and the criminal.

Gun violence is most acute among young black men. The National Council on Crime and Delinquency says the homicide rate per 100,000 of white males between 15 and 19 years old is 1.8. For Hispanic males, it’s 14.6.

For African American males, it’s a staggering 50.6 per 100,000.

Only recently, Richmond, Calif., had among America’s highest per capita rates of gun violence. In 2009, there were 47 homicides among 100,000 residents. Officials there theorized that a few bad actors caused most of the problem. As it turned out, 70 percent of their gun violence in 2008 was caused by fewer than 1 percent of the city’s residents. This isn’t unique: in Cincinnati, less than 1 percent of the city’s population was responsible for 74 percent of homicides in 2007.

Richmond developed an innovative, controversial program: They identified the 50 people most likely to shoot someone and engaged with them, even paying them to participate.

The city provided career help, training, resume writing and health care. It asked people what they feared and helped them create plans to mitigate those fears.

Critics called it “paying gang members not to shoot people.” It was more than that. And it worked.

From 2007 to 2012, the city experienced a 61 percent reduction in homicides. It turned out that the money was nowhere near as important as people had thought — people still show up to the meetings even though no one is paying them anymore. The interventions steered potential killers onto a better path.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/07/14/forget-new-gun-laws-heres-what-could-really-keep-people-from-shooting-each-other/

[jmg257]

1. Seems like Chicago could benefit from this type of program...

"In a city of 2.7 million people, about 1,400 are responsible for much of the violence, Mr. Johnson said, and all of them are on what the department calls its Strategic Subject List.

So far this year, more than 70 percent of the people who have been shot in Chicago were on the list, according to the police, as were more than 80 percent of those arrested in connection with shootings."

“We are targeting the correct individuals,” Mr. Johnson said. “We just need our judicial partners and our state legislators to hold these people accountable.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/us/armed-with-data-chicago-police-try-to-predict-who-may-shoot-or-be-shot.html

[NaturalHigh]

4. My thought exactly.

[Brickbat]

2. Works for me.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

3. K&R... It is more the job of government to empower...

...the people to do the right thing, to help where help is needed and to be resource. Laws that make government into a disciplinarian with an interest in punishment will be counterproductive. I'm sure the privatized prisons would be thrilled to have more crimes on the books of which folks could be convicted but I just don't like the idea of a government that has no interest in helping fix the problems that lead to crime and poverty but a big interest in turning folks with few choices (most of them bad) into criminals.

[krispos42]

5. No, we need to ban telescoping stocks. To send a message.

Or something.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

6. Actually we should just demand a special investigation and clearance...

...for those who want a telescoping stock. Of course your stock would need a serial number and need to be registered and civilians couldn't buy a telescoping manufactured after 2016. There would be a $200 tax stamp involved.

(We need a smiley with its head up its butt.)

[krispos42]

10. Lol!

[Duckhunter935]

11. Don't forget a bazillion dollar

Liability insurance policy too

[Eleanors38]

7. Hold on, now, this smacks of liberal/progressive thought!

[sarisataka]

9. You're right

no secret lists, no mass incarceration... I don't see this getting much support from some segments.

[jonno99]

8. Works for me. nt

[Calista241]

12. Sounds a lot like profiling to me.

But glad it worked.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

13. Profiling without arrest or charges isn't wrong n/t

[ManiacJoe]

14. Profiling is a proven tactic

and it works very well.

On the other hand, racial profiling is useless.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. On second thought...

...anyone who wants to profile me in order to help me with my problems gets a free tuna sandwich!

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

15. kick for visibility n/t