Search

Rates of homicide risk are not evenly distributed across the US population. Prior research indicates that young males in disadvantaged urban neighborhoods are particularly vulnerable to lethal violence. The traditional criminal justice response to violent crime in the urban context has the potential to exacerbate problems, particularly when broad-based arrest sweeps and general deterrence initiatives are the standard models used by law enforcement. Recent studies suggest that alternative intervention approaches that use both specific deterrence combined with improving pro-social opportunities has shown promise in reducing violent crime in these high-risk contexts. This paper examines the changes in homicide patterns for the highest-risk populations in Indianapolis after a “pulling levers” intervention was implemented in the late 1990s to address youth, gang, and gun violence. Multilevel growth curve regression models controlling for a linear trend over time, important structural correlates of homicide across urban neighborhoods, and between-neighborhood variance estimates showed that homicide rates involving the highest-risk populations (i.e., actors 15 to 24 years old) were most likely to experience a statistically significant and substantive reduction after the intervention was implemented (IRR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.29 – 0.78). Among male actors in this age range, Black male homicide rates (IRR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.25 – 0.70) and White male rates (IRR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.15 – 0.79) declined substantially more than homicide rates involving actors outside the 15 to 24 years age range (IRR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.54 – 1.69). In addition, neighborhoods where specific, community-level strategies were implemented had statistically significant and substantive high-risk homicide rate declines. We conclude that further extension of the pulling levers framework appears warranted in light of the recent findings. Alternative justice strategies that rely on the threat of sanctions coupled with strengthening social service provisions, as well as risk communication aimed at high-risk individuals, appears to hold significant promise as a means to reduce lethal violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the publication of analyses suggesting the significant impact on youth homicide of the Boston “pulling levers” intervention, a series of studies of similar strategies have indicated promise in reducing homicide and gun assaults. One of these studies was an assessment of a pulling levers strategy in Indianapolis, where trend analyses indicated a significant reduction in homicide following the intervention, while six other similar Midwestern cities did not experience a significant decline in homicide. We re-assess the results of the Indianapolis study by disaggregating the offenses into gang- and non-gang homicides. Given that the pulling levers program focused on influencing gangs and networks of chronic offenders, the impact of the intervention should be more apparent for gang homicides than for non-gang homicides. Alternatively, should the impact be similar for non-gang homicides, then it is more likely that the downward trend would be caused by unmeasured external forces. Coefficient-difference tests relying on estimates obtained from autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) time–series models indicate that gang homicides declined significantly more than did non-gang homicides following the Indianapolis intervention. These findings suggest ‘something happened’ to gang homicides that did not happen to non-gang homicides, which adds further support that the pulling levers initiative was the driving force behind the overall reduction in homicide in Indianapolis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]