Essay on Gun Violence

The public health problem I decided to address was gun violence, as it is prevalent in the younger population, especially men. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 3rd leading cause of death for ages 15-34 is Homicide (2019). An intervention that has been proven to work in violent cities is a program called the Group Violence Intervention. The Group Violence Intervention consists of local law enforcement officers, social service providers, and community members of a respective city and/or community that work together to reduce gun violence and homicide by focusing on deterrence rather than enforcement (Group Violence Intervention, n.d.). Group/gang members are “called in” by the GVI team and are advised by community members/activists, families of gun violence victims, and police officers to stop resorting to gun violence. Ultimately, the three-pronged message is the key method used to deter group/gang members from gun violence. Additionally, this innovation will foster stronger relationships between law enforcement and the communities they serve through communication and social interaction (Group Violence Intervention, n.d.). I choose this innovation because it is an upstream investment that is more impactful than incarceration. Overall, this intervention aims to mainly target gang/group members, as gangs are responsible for the majority of the violent crimes in their cities (Papachristos and Kirk, 2015), while at-risk individuals that live the high-risk violent areas are the secondary audience.  

The key ingredients that make this innovation effective are: (1) the deterrence-focused approach to address homicides and gun violence, (2) the promotion of relationships between the community and law enforcement to build trust, (3) the intersectoral collaboration of law enforcement, social service workers, and the community to address gun violence, and (4) the personal nature of the program by meeting gang/group members face-to-face to address their actions and to warn them of the consequences. Likewise, as described by Rogers, this innovation has two attributable characteristics that could accelerate the rate of adoption, such as observability and relative advantage (2003). 

The criminal justice system methodology of addressing violence is through incarceration, however, once the offender has served their time, they go back to the same violent environment, causing recidivism. Therefore, the GVI innovation has an obvious relative advantage over enforcement because social services are offered to group/gang members that may need additional resources to live a better life. Also, cities that have implemented this innovation have seen a significant reduction in homicides and gun violence. For instance, Boston has seen a 63% reduction in youth homicides; Lowell, MA has seen a 44% reduction in gun assaults; and Cincinnati, Ohio has seen a 41% reduction in group member-involved homicides (Group Violence Intervention, n.d.), thus the innovation has a high level of observability. Moreover, I believe this intervention is ready for dissemination because a community-based innovation like the GVI doesn’t require distilling clinical and scientific information, just collaborations and partnerships among existing entities. 

Based on the statistics from the CDC in 2019, the murder mortality rates are higher in the southeastern region than any other region in America (Stats of the States). To enumerate, in 2019, South Carolina’s murder mortality rate was 10.2 per 100,000; Alabama’s murder mortality rate was 12.2 per 100,000, and Mississippi’s murder mortality rate was 13.4 per 100,000 (Stats of the States). Whereas, in 2019, Illinois’’ murder mortality rate was 8.0 per 100,000; Ohio’s murder mortality rate was 6.8 per 100,000, and Massachusetts’ murder mortality rate was 2.3 per 100,000 (Stats of the States). For this reason, I would like for this innovation to be implemented more widely in cities in the southeast region.  

Potential adopters of this innovation could be mayors, governors, and county CEOs looking for an effective method to reduce homicides and gun violence in their city, state, or county/district. Moreover, the implementers of this innovation are law enforcement officers, social service providers, and community members who are dedicated to community outreach. For the potential adopters and implementers to deliver this innovation to their communities, some components need to be translated. One, how to measure the group/gang violence situation in their city, and what message is delivered to gang/group violence during the innovation? Secondly, how are leaders selected that will engage with the targeted audience? Lastly, what type of atmosphere should this “call-in” take place? To translate these components, I believe adding training sessions/workshops with the program developers would increase the knowledge and skills of the implementers, which can increase the impact of the innovation. Likewise, the implementers of the GVI innovation will have guidance on how to get the innovation to work for their respective communities, in addition to providing implementors with understanding on how to execute the innovation independently, increasing fidelity. 

The city of New Orleans implemented the GVI innovation in 2012 and has since seen a 32% decrease in group member-involved shootings (Group Violence Intervention, n.d.).  Not to mention, Louisville, Kentucky is another city that has adopted the GVI innovation due to record-breaking gun violence in 2020. According to Kachmar, Louisville had more than 173 homicides and 589 shootings in 2020 (2019).  Being that both Louisville and New Orleans are cities in the southeastern region of the United States, network influences on innovativeness as described by Rogers could be an interpersonal network method to facilitate the dissemination and adoption of the GVI innovation (2003). Therefore, to spread this innovation to cities in the southeastern region, I would conduct a face-to-face and/or a virtual meeting; an interpersonal communication network, to contact governors, mayors, police chiefs, community activists, and social services providers to present the innovation. Also, I will have implementers and adopters from New Orleans and Louisville attend the meeting to attest to the effectiveness and qualities of the GVI innovation.