Life on a hair trigger

In some U.S. cities, gun violence is so common that it feels like a normal part of life rather than an exceptional event. For example, in Chicago’s Garfield Park neighborhood, a young man’s risk of being killed between 2020 and 2021 was higher than that of a U.S. soldier deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq. By age 40, about half of Chicago’s Black and Hispanic residents will have witnessed someone being shot. Violence is not evenly spread across cities—most shootings happen in a few dozen blocks and involve a small group of people, less than 1% of the population. This means that while citywide crime rates may decline, those living in high-violence areas experience danger as an ongoing condition, not an occasional event. The article highlights how this constant exposure shapes the way people think and act in their daily lives.

King, a 26-year-old man from Chicago, illustrates how violence becomes a cycle of retaliation. When his friend Lamont was killed, King immediately prepared his gun, filled the clip with bullets, and planned to seek revenge. He explained that retaliation felt like an inevitability, not a choice, because others in his community shared the same anger and desire for payback. King’s reaction reflects a mindset where violence is seen as the only way to respond to loss or perceived threats. His story shows how grief and anger can quickly escalate into further violence, perpetuating a cycle that many in his community struggle to break.

READI Chicago is a community violence intervention program designed to reduce gun violence by working with men at the highest risk of being involved in shootings or homicides. Between 2022 and 2023, the program enrolled 99 men from Chicago’s most violent neighborhoods, all of whom had extensive criminal records (averaging more than 17 arrests each) and 35% of whom had been shot. Participants were paid to work part-time jobs and attend group cognitive behavioural intervention (CBI) sessions three to five times a week. These sessions, called CAD (a reference to the computer keystroke that reboots a system), taught men to slow down their reactions, question their automatic thoughts, and consider alternative responses in tense situations. The program also provided support for housing, legal issues, and substance use to help participants stay engaged.

Living in a violent environment trains the mind to anticipate danger in everyday situations. Research with the men in READI Chicago revealed three common patterns in how they interpreted and responded to conflicts. First, they often misread ambiguous situations as threats, such as interpreting a stranger’s prolonged gaze as hostile. Second, they experienced a narrowing of response options, where revenge or violence seemed like the only possible reaction, as seen in King’s decision to seek payback for Lamont’s death. Third, they internalized violent behavior as part of their identity, believing they were inherently bad people because of their actions. These patterns are not irrational but are adaptations to real danger, though they can lead to harmful outcomes when applied in the wrong context.

The men’s tendency to interpret ambiguous situations as dangerous can turn harmless encounters into violent conflicts. For example, Nuke, a 24-year-old participant, described reacting aggressively to a stranger who looked at him too long, even though the stranger may have had no harmful intent. This threat-oriented frame is a mental shortcut that prioritizes quick responses over careful consideration. While such vigilance can be life-saving in dangerous situations, it can also create unnecessary conflict when overgeneralized. The article compares this to driving: a misreading might lead to a honked horn or a curse, but for someone like Nuke, it could lead to jail or death. The challenge is learning to distinguish between real threats and situations where vigilance is not needed.

Many of the men interviewed came to see themselves as inherently violent people, a belief that made future violence more likely. For example, William, who lost 11 close friends to gun violence by age 29, described himself as a 'monster' who needed to kill to feel safe. Terrel, who experienced childhood trauma including the loss of his mother and sister, saw his anger as proof that he was a 'bad person.' This fundamental attribution error—the tendency to explain behavior through character rather than circumstance—reinforced their belief that violence was an unavoidable part of who they were. Accepting this identity made it harder for them to imagine alternatives to violent responses.

The CAD sessions in READI Chicago aimed to help participants reframe their automatic reactions and widen their response options. For example, when presented with a scenario where someone calls them a name, participants were encouraged to pause and consider alternatives to violence. The program’s effectiveness was measured in a randomised controlled trial, which found that participants were arrested for shootings and homicides 65% less often than comparable men who did not receive the intervention. Similar programs, like Becoming a Man (a school-based initiative for high-school students), also showed significant reductions in violent-crime arrests. These results suggest that changing how people interpret and respond to situations can break the cycle of violence.