In June 2023, a nighttime incident shed light on the intensity of violence in cities like Chicago. The story unfolds with Carlishia Hood and her academically accomplished fourteen-year-old son stopping at Maxwell Street Express, a 24-hour takeout spot in West Pullman, at the far end of South Side Chicago. The son remained in the car as Hood entered the eatery. Trouble brewed when Hood, unintendedly disrupting the establishment’s speedy service, requested a customized order. Jeremy Brown, the man in line behind her, felt irritated as it delayed him. Increasingly impatient, Brown’s emotions soon escalated into a physical altercation with Hood. In response, her son shot Brown, pursuing him outside until he collapsed and died on the roadside, marking one of the fatal shootings that particular weekend in Chicago.
This incident draws us to a dichotomy explored by various criminologists — the distinction between automatic, intuitive, and speedy actions versus the slow, painstaking, and thoughtful ones. This dichotomy resonates strongly in the realm of criminal violence. Its application reveals two types of violent crimes. First, there are ‘instrumental’ violent acts or those aimed to seize tangible assets or territory (encompassing System 2 reasoning), and second, there are expressions of violence driven by an abrupt surge of anger or frustration (encompassing System 1 reasoning).
The crux of the problem, as laid out in a socio-criminological narrative, is that the American approach to combatting crime often misunderstands its nature. The common perception is that instrumental violence is predominantly responsible for crime, and hence our justice system is modeled around this approach. In reality, however, a significant percentage of violence is ‘expressive’ rather than ‘instrumental’, echoing the volatile aftermath at Maxwell Street Express.
Such narratives gained momentum when they had to grapple with unexpected developments. During the 1990s, crime rates in urban areas across the United States, most notably in New York City, plummeted significantly. Considering gun violence was deeply woven into the societal fabric due to reasons such as racial discrimination, poverty, and helplessness, this sudden shift questioned their longstanding prevalence. If these issues were the root cause, how did New York’s homicide rate cut down by more than half within a single decade? Shouldn’t deeply entrenched problems exhibit slower rates of resolution?
Another perspective that argued that the criminal’s private pathologies, including developmental stunting, childhood trauma, or antisocial proclivities, were the primary reasons behind violent crime. These proponents insisted on scrutinizing the criminal’s personal history and mental state. However, an examination of crime statistics in various cities indicated otherwise. Violence seemed to be concentrated in certain blocks within the city, persisting as hotpots of violent crime year after year. This continual pattern hinted at an inconvenient truth — the problem was less about the people involved and more about the location where the violence occurred.
Interestingly, the transformation of these crime-prone areas into peaceful public spaces has led to an impressive drop in gun violence — a whopping twenty-nine percent! The populations of these neighborhoods remained unchanged, as did the alleged ‘pathologies’ and the policing force. The only variable that changed was the regular maintenance of the green spaces in these neighborhoods, showing that sometimes, the solution to a problem can be as simple as a regular lawn mowing.
The book’s primary quest is to resolve the dichotomy of violence and its impact on crime. The author asserts that the puzzling nature of these criminal episodes arises due to the stark differences between the System 1 approach and the System 2 approach in criminal behavior. The System 1 approach is characterized by its egocentricity, interpreting incidents through a personal lens, focusing on threats, and always expecting the worst.
However, there’s a significant topic that’s not sufficiently addressed in the book — the role of firearms in escalating violence. While the incident at Maxwell Street Express was arguably aggravated by the presence of a firearm, the omission of this fact is notable. In countries with tighter gun control policies, the altercation between Hood and Brown might have remained a mere fistfight. However, the author is exhausted from common gun-control debates and is skeptical that the United States will implement thorough restrictions.
The author instead calls for a more nuanced understanding of System 1 criminal behavior. For starters, it’s imperative to refrain from categorizing criminals as fundamentally different or morally separate from ordinary individuals. Jeremy Brown and Hood’s son weren’t incarnations of evil; they were mere victims of an unforgiving situation that spiraled out of control. Secondly, he urges a halt in locking up massive amounts of people for longer prison terms. Instead, he proposes adult intervention to defuse potentially violent confrontations among adolescents.
Moreover, considerable attention should be given to what delineates safe neighborhoods from their dangerous counterparts. Adequate lighting improves visibility and makes potential offenders conscious of their actions as they are more noticeable. However, behavioral modification provides the most effective way to limit violence, as per the author.
Finally, a program is described where the effect of behavioral modification is illustrated by a simple exercise. Each participant is paired with another one, where one has a ball and the other is set to retrieve it in 30 seconds, exhibiting potential conflict situations. Most of the time, a simple request can avoid confrontations, as exemplified by the usual response: ‘I would have given it, it’s just a stupid ball.’ Similarly, most of the causes of expressive violence are trivial, analogous to the ‘stupid ball’ or the special order request at Maxwell Street Express. No one intended to kill or die that fateful night, demonstrating the erratic and unplanned nature of ‘expressive’ violence.