What do you think?
Rate this book
Bleeding Out: The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence--and a Bold New Plan for Peace in the Streets
From a Harvard scholar and former Obama official, a powerful proposal for curtailing violent crime in America Urban violence is one of the most divisive and allegedly intractable issues of our time. But as Harvard scholar Thomas Abt shows in Bleeding Out, we actually possess all the tools necessary to stem violence in our cities.Coupling the latest social science with firsthand experience as a crime-fighter, Abt proposes a relentless focus on violence itself -- not drugs, gangs, or guns. Because violence is "sticky," clustering among small groups of people and places, it can be predicted and prevented using a series of smart-on-crime strategies that do not require new laws or big budgets. Bringing these strategies together, Abt offers a concrete, cost-effective plan to reduce homicides by over 50 percent in eight years, saving more than 12,000 lives nationally. Violence acts as a linchpin for urban poverty, so curbing such crime can unlock the untapped potential of our cities' most disadvantaged communities and help us to bridge the nation's larger economic and social divides.Urgent yet hopeful, Bleeding Out offers practical solutions to the national emergency of urban violence -- and challenges readers to demand action.
305 pages, Kindle Edition
Published June 25, 2019
75 people are currently reading
843 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
June 8, 2020
Review in the Winter 2020 of the Cato Journal, can be found here https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/win...
Since its peak in the early 1990s, violent crime in the United States has been trending downward. Per capita victimizations remain near record lows despite a recent uptick in homicides in several major U.S. cities. On net, America is safer than it has been in two generations, and perhaps it is the safest it has ever been.
In spite of this era of low violence, there are nearly 40,000 gun deaths in the United States every year. This number is cited often in the gun control debate as “victims of gun violence,” but most gun deaths are suicides, comprising nearly two‐thirds of the annual gun death total. Contrary to the violence trend, American suicides are on the rise, particularly among white men, and thus these tens of thousands of deaths merit greater attention than they are currently receiving. But suicides are separate from “gun violence,” understood most commonly as bodily harm inflicted upon another person. And while interpersonal violence is down in the country as a whole, where it remains — in segregated, often impoverished areas of American cities — gun violence is an acute public policy crisis.
In his book, Bleeding Out: The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence and a Bold New Plan for Peace in the Streets, Thomas Abt of the Harvard Kennedy School confronts urban violence with public policy triage. Drawing from many sources, including evidence‐based policing research, sociological explanations for criminogenic stressors, and psychological treatment literature, Abt provides an often compelling, though incomplete, proposal for addressing the root causes of urban violence.
The greatest strength of the book is its multidisciplinary approach to explaining what urban violence is and who is committing the crimes he describes. It is too easy to treat urban violence as simply bad guys doing bad things, or worse, the racial/cultural scapegoating that dominates a lot of the anti‐crime rhetoric on the political right. Abt dismisses the “easy answers” that come from these and other simple assumptions about crime that lead to bad policies. For example, while guns, gangs, and drugs all contribute to urban violence, policies that do not differentiate between drug use and violent drug markets, or that encourage police to treat all suspected “gang‐affiliated” youths like murderous criminals, will ultimately fail to make a community safer and more often will cause more problems than they solve.
Abt proposes three “fundamentals” to undergird his anti‐violence vision: focus, balance, and fairness. In very broad strokes, these fundamentals instruct stakeholders to
*focus on the highest priority individuals who are most at risk to fall victim to or perpetrate urban violence;
*balance the approach between “carrot and stick” incentives to keep the high‐risk individuals out of trouble with community support and the increased likelihood of consequences for bad behavior;
*use fairness as a tool to establish the essential legitimacy of the government and its rules to increase compliance with the laws.
But the devil, as always, is in the details.
Conspicuously absent from Abt’s otherwise fair critique of the dominant views and failed programs of the past is a serious discussion of police responsibility for the current state of affairs in the communities suffering from violence. He spends some time discussing the lack of trust of police in the black and Latino communities and rightfully blames aggressive mis‐policing for some of that ire. But Abt also glosses over the problems endemic in many cities and police departments. In the chapter “How Talk Informs Action,” he writes:
“[N]ot all members of law enforcement are to blame for the actions of a corrupt and brutal few. Characterizing the current criminal justice system as a tool for racial subjugation is not constructive. Cops and communities plagued by violence need one another, and politicos in both parties should recognize that.”
Even if one grants that problem officers are a small minority among the vast majority of good cops, our current systems for holding police officers accountable are ineffective from top to bottom. Administrative discipline for misconduct is largely shielded from public view and very rarely results in officer termination. Criminal charges for on‐duty misconduct is even rarer, despite some high‐profile arrests of officers caught on camera. And the doctrine of qualified immunity has rendered civil remedy even more rare than it otherwise may be. As a result, people who don’t trust the police after they or someone they know have been abused have little reason to change their minds.
But what researchers and residents know about how police generally operate undermines the “bad apples” hypothesis. Aggressive policing that is focused almost exclusively in black and brown neighborhoods is racial subjugation in effect, if not necessarily in intention. Dismissing such complaints as “not constructive” relieves the police of their obligation to face the harsh consequences of their actions. Without an acknowledgment of the wrongs of the past and present, there is little realistic hope for establishing police legitimacy in the future.
Moreover, while many police departments are primarily guilty of implementing bad policy in good faith, some departments are corrupt or significantly captured by self‐serving officers that they can operate with near impunity. As the saying goes, “culture eats policy for breakfast,” and too many departments have toxic cultures that are flatly incompatible with establishing the fairness and legitimacy Abt rightly prescribes. As such, those communities whose police departments have long histories of corruption and torture will likely have to rely heavily on nongovernmental methods to reduce violence without significant police involvement. If readers are to take Abt’s triage metaphor seriously, and they should, dismantling and reconstructing the most problematic police departments must be part of the long‐term care of those communities.
Bleeding Out is an ambitious book that provides a welcomed context to the problem of urban violence. Abt commendably collects and accessibly presents the broad array of academic literature and practical studies to prescribe necessary changes to how we think about and address violent crime. Abt correctly recognizes the perceptions of the illegitimacy of American police, particularly by black Americans, but he misplaces the responsibility to fix that perception onto activists and critics rather than the police themselves. Where the police are competent to adjust and cooperate to community needs, the onus is on them to prove it. Where police are not able to do so, they must be removed and replaced — or, at least, they must get out of the way.
Since its peak in the early 1990s, violent crime in the United States has been trending downward. Per capita victimizations remain near record lows despite a recent uptick in homicides in several major U.S. cities. On net, America is safer than it has been in two generations, and perhaps it is the safest it has ever been.
In spite of this era of low violence, there are nearly 40,000 gun deaths in the United States every year. This number is cited often in the gun control debate as “victims of gun violence,” but most gun deaths are suicides, comprising nearly two‐thirds of the annual gun death total. Contrary to the violence trend, American suicides are on the rise, particularly among white men, and thus these tens of thousands of deaths merit greater attention than they are currently receiving. But suicides are separate from “gun violence,” understood most commonly as bodily harm inflicted upon another person. And while interpersonal violence is down in the country as a whole, where it remains — in segregated, often impoverished areas of American cities — gun violence is an acute public policy crisis.
In his book, Bleeding Out: The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence and a Bold New Plan for Peace in the Streets, Thomas Abt of the Harvard Kennedy School confronts urban violence with public policy triage. Drawing from many sources, including evidence‐based policing research, sociological explanations for criminogenic stressors, and psychological treatment literature, Abt provides an often compelling, though incomplete, proposal for addressing the root causes of urban violence.
The greatest strength of the book is its multidisciplinary approach to explaining what urban violence is and who is committing the crimes he describes. It is too easy to treat urban violence as simply bad guys doing bad things, or worse, the racial/cultural scapegoating that dominates a lot of the anti‐crime rhetoric on the political right. Abt dismisses the “easy answers” that come from these and other simple assumptions about crime that lead to bad policies. For example, while guns, gangs, and drugs all contribute to urban violence, policies that do not differentiate between drug use and violent drug markets, or that encourage police to treat all suspected “gang‐affiliated” youths like murderous criminals, will ultimately fail to make a community safer and more often will cause more problems than they solve.
Abt proposes three “fundamentals” to undergird his anti‐violence vision: focus, balance, and fairness. In very broad strokes, these fundamentals instruct stakeholders to
*focus on the highest priority individuals who are most at risk to fall victim to or perpetrate urban violence;
*balance the approach between “carrot and stick” incentives to keep the high‐risk individuals out of trouble with community support and the increased likelihood of consequences for bad behavior;
*use fairness as a tool to establish the essential legitimacy of the government and its rules to increase compliance with the laws.
But the devil, as always, is in the details.
Conspicuously absent from Abt’s otherwise fair critique of the dominant views and failed programs of the past is a serious discussion of police responsibility for the current state of affairs in the communities suffering from violence. He spends some time discussing the lack of trust of police in the black and Latino communities and rightfully blames aggressive mis‐policing for some of that ire. But Abt also glosses over the problems endemic in many cities and police departments. In the chapter “How Talk Informs Action,” he writes:
“[N]ot all members of law enforcement are to blame for the actions of a corrupt and brutal few. Characterizing the current criminal justice system as a tool for racial subjugation is not constructive. Cops and communities plagued by violence need one another, and politicos in both parties should recognize that.”
Even if one grants that problem officers are a small minority among the vast majority of good cops, our current systems for holding police officers accountable are ineffective from top to bottom. Administrative discipline for misconduct is largely shielded from public view and very rarely results in officer termination. Criminal charges for on‐duty misconduct is even rarer, despite some high‐profile arrests of officers caught on camera. And the doctrine of qualified immunity has rendered civil remedy even more rare than it otherwise may be. As a result, people who don’t trust the police after they or someone they know have been abused have little reason to change their minds.
But what researchers and residents know about how police generally operate undermines the “bad apples” hypothesis. Aggressive policing that is focused almost exclusively in black and brown neighborhoods is racial subjugation in effect, if not necessarily in intention. Dismissing such complaints as “not constructive” relieves the police of their obligation to face the harsh consequences of their actions. Without an acknowledgment of the wrongs of the past and present, there is little realistic hope for establishing police legitimacy in the future.
Moreover, while many police departments are primarily guilty of implementing bad policy in good faith, some departments are corrupt or significantly captured by self‐serving officers that they can operate with near impunity. As the saying goes, “culture eats policy for breakfast,” and too many departments have toxic cultures that are flatly incompatible with establishing the fairness and legitimacy Abt rightly prescribes. As such, those communities whose police departments have long histories of corruption and torture will likely have to rely heavily on nongovernmental methods to reduce violence without significant police involvement. If readers are to take Abt’s triage metaphor seriously, and they should, dismantling and reconstructing the most problematic police departments must be part of the long‐term care of those communities.
Bleeding Out is an ambitious book that provides a welcomed context to the problem of urban violence. Abt commendably collects and accessibly presents the broad array of academic literature and practical studies to prescribe necessary changes to how we think about and address violent crime. Abt correctly recognizes the perceptions of the illegitimacy of American police, particularly by black Americans, but he misplaces the responsibility to fix that perception onto activists and critics rather than the police themselves. Where the police are competent to adjust and cooperate to community needs, the onus is on them to prove it. Where police are not able to do so, they must be removed and replaced — or, at least, they must get out of the way.
February 11, 2020
Excellent overview of some suggestions for reducing urban violence. Abt is impressive in his framing of the crisis of urban violence as a civil rights issue, and his constructive suggestions rather than the academic default of endless critique. I do tend to take suggestions that involve increasing policing from white men with a grain of salt, but he suggests some good ways to make policing effective for violence reduction. Above all his suggestion is focus on data-driven methods of violence reduction, rather than trying to tackle the problem from the side through poverty reduction or school based interventions for example. This is a practical, level headed look at a critical issue.
May 8, 2023
I started out pretty skeptical—I mean, a book that is focused on urban gun violence and not mass shootings? A book focused on the involvement of law enforcement and not police abolition? A book focused on resolving violence before underlying issues of poverty? In this political climate? I wasn’t sure.
Needless to say, the author had a lot to win me over on—and he really did. Through this book I learned a lot about what gun deaths actually look like in the US—who is being killed, why, and by whom—and what policies, plans, rhetoric are effective (and not effective) at preventing gun violence. I was really challenged, but also pretty convinced, when some of what I learned came up against some of my preconceptions. The author is very credible and sure to let you know what of his claims have a lot of evidence-based support and which ideas are still fledgling empirically.
While the book did convince me that law enforcement is potentially necessary in gun violence prevention and that low-income, communities of color don’t necessarily want the abolition of law enforcement, they just want increased fairness, balance, transparency, and honesty in law enforcement—I am still skeptical that reformation of an entire system created to subjugate people of color can truly change. I’m not sure Abt fully addressed how to solve the issues in law enforcement / criminal justice systems enough to put me at ease. The US has a pretty bad track record of “making equal” spaces and systems that were designed to keep white and non white spaces separate and unequal—the healthcare, education, agriculture, etc—if we couldn’t fix the issues in these spaces, despite pretty good public buy-in, who’s to say we could “fix” the criminal justice / law enforcement system? Especially when skepticism and distrust of policing is at an all time high.
While I still retain some concerns, overall I am very respectful of this book and it’s goal. It really addresses racism and false rhetoric, both progressive and conservative, around gun violence and provides concrete solutions that could end deaths by guns TODAY.
Needless to say, the author had a lot to win me over on—and he really did. Through this book I learned a lot about what gun deaths actually look like in the US—who is being killed, why, and by whom—and what policies, plans, rhetoric are effective (and not effective) at preventing gun violence. I was really challenged, but also pretty convinced, when some of what I learned came up against some of my preconceptions. The author is very credible and sure to let you know what of his claims have a lot of evidence-based support and which ideas are still fledgling empirically.
While the book did convince me that law enforcement is potentially necessary in gun violence prevention and that low-income, communities of color don’t necessarily want the abolition of law enforcement, they just want increased fairness, balance, transparency, and honesty in law enforcement—I am still skeptical that reformation of an entire system created to subjugate people of color can truly change. I’m not sure Abt fully addressed how to solve the issues in law enforcement / criminal justice systems enough to put me at ease. The US has a pretty bad track record of “making equal” spaces and systems that were designed to keep white and non white spaces separate and unequal—the healthcare, education, agriculture, etc—if we couldn’t fix the issues in these spaces, despite pretty good public buy-in, who’s to say we could “fix” the criminal justice / law enforcement system? Especially when skepticism and distrust of policing is at an all time high.
While I still retain some concerns, overall I am very respectful of this book and it’s goal. It really addresses racism and false rhetoric, both progressive and conservative, around gun violence and provides concrete solutions that could end deaths by guns TODAY.
March 3, 2021
Thomas Abt shapes the conversation on urban violence in an interesting and digestible way, and comes up with actionable items that can steer our cities into a safer future. While rather dry and clinical at times, the book does what it set out to do: have us agree on the problem, and give us a solution. Now it's up to us to hold our elected officials accountable to stop the bleeding.
September 27, 2019
Best justice reform book I’ve read in a long time.
August 16, 2019
A smart, thoughtful and extremely well informed book by an expert in the field. If we're lucky, Bleeding Out is going to be seen as an important and influential book, a milestone in public policy. (Of course, how often have we been lucky lately?)
Like a lot of public policy books intended for a mass audience, it's basically 50 pages' worth of ideas and data stretched to a 250-page book because, uh, that's how long books are supposed to be? I guess? This means it feels repetitive at times, and the policy-prescription chapters especially feel a little bloated. But it's still a good book, and you won't regret reading it.
Like a lot of public policy books intended for a mass audience, it's basically 50 pages' worth of ideas and data stretched to a 250-page book because, uh, that's how long books are supposed to be? I guess? This means it feels repetitive at times, and the policy-prescription chapters especially feel a little bloated. But it's still a good book, and you won't regret reading it.
January 3, 2022
The author wrote this as a book in three parts, but it is really a book in two parts.
Taking the author's three part division first, the book looks at issues of urban violence and in particular at urban homicide [it is an American book]. The first part looks at what the problem is in terms of what motivates young men [it is almost always young men] to commite homicide. This section also looks at the response of police and city authorities to the street violence as it has been in the past. This also touches on the accusations of and reality of racism in US society and how that is reflected in the justice system.
The second section looks at more recent innovative schemes that have addressed the issues of urban violence. This is clearly where the author's passion lies. He believes firmly in what he terms "progressive policies" to address violence largely through dealing with the social backgrounds where violence takes place. He is open to police and judicial action having a role, but only in a supportive role.
The third section of the book [or the second part] is where for me it all falls apart. In the author's view he is here dealing with how to move forwards to make sure that his favoured policies and ideas are put into practice. Sadly [in my view] what happens here is that he loses patience with people who don't agree with him. Rather than seeking to persuade them, he wants to force them to do what he says. And like far too many who are faced by people who disagree with him when he is so obviously correct he fails to see why anyone could possibly disagree with him unless they are either stupid, evil or have vested interests. And so he goes off the deep end, losing the sympathy of readers, like myself, who partially agree with him. All very sad after the firs 150 pages of the book.
Taking the author's three part division first, the book looks at issues of urban violence and in particular at urban homicide [it is an American book]. The first part looks at what the problem is in terms of what motivates young men [it is almost always young men] to commite homicide. This section also looks at the response of police and city authorities to the street violence as it has been in the past. This also touches on the accusations of and reality of racism in US society and how that is reflected in the justice system.
The second section looks at more recent innovative schemes that have addressed the issues of urban violence. This is clearly where the author's passion lies. He believes firmly in what he terms "progressive policies" to address violence largely through dealing with the social backgrounds where violence takes place. He is open to police and judicial action having a role, but only in a supportive role.
The third section of the book [or the second part] is where for me it all falls apart. In the author's view he is here dealing with how to move forwards to make sure that his favoured policies and ideas are put into practice. Sadly [in my view] what happens here is that he loses patience with people who don't agree with him. Rather than seeking to persuade them, he wants to force them to do what he says. And like far too many who are faced by people who disagree with him when he is so obviously correct he fails to see why anyone could possibly disagree with him unless they are either stupid, evil or have vested interests. And so he goes off the deep end, losing the sympathy of readers, like myself, who partially agree with him. All very sad after the firs 150 pages of the book.
September 2, 2022
This is a very insightful, informative, and pragmatic book from public safety expert and practitioner Thomas Abt, who I had the pleasure to serve with in the Obama Administration. We all need to better understand Thomas' vision and strategy to reduce urban violence, both in our own communities and across our country. A few of my most important takeaways:
- a balance of punishment and prevention works far better to reduce urban violence than either approach in isolation.
- The law is most powerful when self-executing and self-perpetuating. It works best when citizens, not police, regulate their community’s conduct. In a sense, if the law must be enforced, it has already lost.
- Instead of guns, think illegal gun carrying; instead of gangs, gangbanging; instead of drugs, violent drug dealing.
- Sound firearm policy depends on reconciling these two truths: more guns means more gun deaths, but few guns are actually used to kill people.
- Ninety-three percent of African American homicide victims were killed by a member of their own race. Likewise, 84 percent of white homicide victims were killed by another white person, yet such violence is not labeled “white on white.”
- To make a big difference in the lives of the urban poor, new laws and new structures are not necessary—at least not right away. For now, what is required is money, along with small but vocal constituencies to demand that it be spent the right way.
- a balance of punishment and prevention works far better to reduce urban violence than either approach in isolation.
- The law is most powerful when self-executing and self-perpetuating. It works best when citizens, not police, regulate their community’s conduct. In a sense, if the law must be enforced, it has already lost.
- Instead of guns, think illegal gun carrying; instead of gangs, gangbanging; instead of drugs, violent drug dealing.
- Sound firearm policy depends on reconciling these two truths: more guns means more gun deaths, but few guns are actually used to kill people.
- Ninety-three percent of African American homicide victims were killed by a member of their own race. Likewise, 84 percent of white homicide victims were killed by another white person, yet such violence is not labeled “white on white.”
- To make a big difference in the lives of the urban poor, new laws and new structures are not necessary—at least not right away. For now, what is required is money, along with small but vocal constituencies to demand that it be spent the right way.
March 3, 2020
Interesting how books I read come in pairs. I did "Talking with strangers" just before starting this book only to discover the context of this book was similar regarding how we should talk and not just assume the person we are pulling over is a criminal. Then to make it even more funny in similarities, my daughter and I were watching one of the many U.S. Democratic debates and at the time Bloomberg was challenged on why did you do stop and frisk.
Stop I tell my HS jr. daughter taking AP politics and gov; let's explore why NY started stop and frisk, let's explore that not all police policies work and that societies do try to implement and improve their districts based on the success of other districts sometimes not knowing the full premise of why and how it was implemented including the back story. Yeah me for fun details that without this book I might have asked the same question. I would applaud Mayor Bloomberg and other Mayor's in the US for trying. Yes, not all policies work, yes, sometimes some are big wins in one location but a failure in others and yes I agree with the author that a combination of policies and many other factors are needed and that there is no silver bullet.
Thank you for making me able to articulate, much to my daughters sch-grin that dad does listen to too many different types of audiobooks :)
Stop I tell my HS jr. daughter taking AP politics and gov; let's explore why NY started stop and frisk, let's explore that not all police policies work and that societies do try to implement and improve their districts based on the success of other districts sometimes not knowing the full premise of why and how it was implemented including the back story. Yeah me for fun details that without this book I might have asked the same question. I would applaud Mayor Bloomberg and other Mayor's in the US for trying. Yes, not all policies work, yes, sometimes some are big wins in one location but a failure in others and yes I agree with the author that a combination of policies and many other factors are needed and that there is no silver bullet.
Thank you for making me able to articulate, much to my daughters sch-grin that dad does listen to too many different types of audiobooks :)
October 11, 2020
This is a well written assessment and plan for reducing urban violence. It focuses on the reduction of violent crime (mostly murders) rather than reducing poverty or improving housing or other initiatives that focus on drugs, petty crime etc.
The author’s overall point and strategy is critical to implementation: no amount of intervention work can improve the roughly 7,000 violent impoverished neighborhoods in the US without first focusing on violence reduction. Kids can’t learn when there is a constant threat at their front door or in their schools. Businesses can’t flourish when customers fear being shot or killed on their premises. Housing initiatives and cleanup efforts will not take root if volunteers and workers are perpetually concerned they will be killed. Police interventions will not be helpful if the relationship between the police and the community is severed.
The author best describes the work himself:
“This nation is in need of a moral reckoning. Americans on the right and left may disagree on how best to address poverty, but we should all be able to agree that the poor do not deserve to die suddenly and violently at the end of a gun barrel. They do not deserve to see their family and friends pierced and punctured by bullets. No one does. Surely this truth lies above some universal baseline of compassion that we all share.”
The author’s overall point and strategy is critical to implementation: no amount of intervention work can improve the roughly 7,000 violent impoverished neighborhoods in the US without first focusing on violence reduction. Kids can’t learn when there is a constant threat at their front door or in their schools. Businesses can’t flourish when customers fear being shot or killed on their premises. Housing initiatives and cleanup efforts will not take root if volunteers and workers are perpetually concerned they will be killed. Police interventions will not be helpful if the relationship between the police and the community is severed.
The author best describes the work himself:
“This nation is in need of a moral reckoning. Americans on the right and left may disagree on how best to address poverty, but we should all be able to agree that the poor do not deserve to die suddenly and violently at the end of a gun barrel. They do not deserve to see their family and friends pierced and punctured by bullets. No one does. Surely this truth lies above some universal baseline of compassion that we all share.”
December 9, 2020
Bleeding Out is critical reading for a better society.
If my goal was to kill as many black folks as possible (every white person's dream, I'm told) I'd convince the media to utterly ignore the urban violence epidemic that is the #1 killer of young black men. Instead, I'd convince everyone that there's an evil horde of "racist cops" who love nothing more than killing black men (killing anyone else makes them sad) and then spending MONTHS filling out paperwork, talking to administrators & lawyers, being stalked and threatened, and appearing in court. Lucky for evil sociopaths, AntiFa & BLM do just that. Unfortunately for those of us who actually care about black lives (dare I say ALL lives?), AntiFa & BLM do just that.
WHICH IS TO SAY that Thomas Abt's Bleeding Out, filled with both data and powerful testimony, can save thousands of lives a year as soon as society decides to prioritize stopping the bleeding over pursuing a "racist cop" witch-hunt.
I should point out that Abt makes ZERO MENTION of woke activists. That rage and disgust is ALL me. He simply details his lifelong professional analysis of the things that drive & curb urban crime. I simply find it impossible not to connect the dots, and wish that people cared enough to study this epidemic problem.
If my goal was to kill as many black folks as possible (every white person's dream, I'm told) I'd convince the media to utterly ignore the urban violence epidemic that is the #1 killer of young black men. Instead, I'd convince everyone that there's an evil horde of "racist cops" who love nothing more than killing black men (killing anyone else makes them sad) and then spending MONTHS filling out paperwork, talking to administrators & lawyers, being stalked and threatened, and appearing in court. Lucky for evil sociopaths, AntiFa & BLM do just that. Unfortunately for those of us who actually care about black lives (dare I say ALL lives?), AntiFa & BLM do just that.
WHICH IS TO SAY that Thomas Abt's Bleeding Out, filled with both data and powerful testimony, can save thousands of lives a year as soon as society decides to prioritize stopping the bleeding over pursuing a "racist cop" witch-hunt.
I should point out that Abt makes ZERO MENTION of woke activists. That rage and disgust is ALL me. He simply details his lifelong professional analysis of the things that drive & curb urban crime. I simply find it impossible not to connect the dots, and wish that people cared enough to study this epidemic problem.
June 29, 2020
An argument that the first problem to fix in America is to stop urban violence, doing so would save billions of dollars in a short time, and help to solve other problems related to inequity in America. The best way to do that is through a combination of programs that encourage changed behavior with a threat of serious consequences for failing to do so. Different approaches should be taken for those identified as “someday shooters” and “would-be shooters.” He also writes that this could be done through partnerships between police and community based organizations using research proven strategies without enacting additional laws. Focus should be based on violent behaviors, not behavior associated with violent behavior—gang banging vs. gang membership, or violent drug dealing vs. drug use, for example.
Mr. Abt also wrote that it’s past time time to deal with ideological approaches to the problem of urban violence, and both progressives and conservatives appeal to their bases and attempts to blame police or double down on police respectively are both doomed to failure.
A very well balanced book with realistic solutions to urban violence.
Mr. Abt also wrote that it’s past time time to deal with ideological approaches to the problem of urban violence, and both progressives and conservatives appeal to their bases and attempts to blame police or double down on police respectively are both doomed to failure.
A very well balanced book with realistic solutions to urban violence.
October 26, 2021
A straightforward idea (albeit not simple to execute as it requires multiple groups to work together seamlessly on several fronts, in some cases where some of the groups and/or infrastructure doesn't even yet exist) to reduce urban violence (which the author strictly defines as shootings resulting in injury and/or death). In Appendix A, he speaks to the difficulty of implementing this approach nationally until they discovered a framework from California which they adopted. Another difficulty he references is the stakeholders which must buy-in for the idea to work. Still, seems worth exploring where possible. The author also appears misguided on several items, e.g., 1) that significantly reducing urban violence will make a neighborhood safe (perhaps limited exposure explains the apparent ignorance that there are neighborhoods where shootings are infrequent but robberies, muggings and rapes are still common) and 2) disparagement of broken window policing (using the maligned definition rather than the initial definition), as if police have the luxury of ignoring other forms of crime to focus solely on urban violence as he defines it.
January 25, 2024
Overall a good read. Not a book I would recommend to folks to read as a “casual” read. The book is definitely a little heavier and slower at times, with a large emphasis on systems and applications. The approach is great and evidence based which unfortunately leads to a lot of moments of reading through technical pieces. The stories of individuals impacted and recovered from Urban Violence was great and easily the most readable piece. That being said I would have greatly appreciated more stories or examples from folks in communities that have been transformed. Not that we have to make entertainment out of others sufferings but to have the folks impacted by urban violence the most tell their stories about what has worked and hasn’t worked is a powerful tool that I think could have been used more. Overall a good book, and would recommend for folks that are passionate or have connections with systems preventing urban violence but wouldn’t declare it a must read by any standards.
May 12, 2020
Thomas Abt takes a serious evidence based look at how to reduce urban violence in the US. While he does favor root cause mitigation, he states there are other actions that need to be taken immediately. The analogy he uses is a bleeding femoral artery absolutely needs a tourniquet in order for the patient to still be alive for the trauma surgery team to repair the artery. Abt's tourniquet on America's urban violence includes focused deterrence, hot spot policing, and cognitive behavioral therapy for shooting victims and likely soon-to-be shooters. Abt sites the research that shows an intervention to be successful or readily admits it when an idea looks promising but lacks conclusive empirical evidence on its effectiveness.
May 5, 2025
I had high hopes for this book! It talks about people places and things(behaviors) - my favorite model across all areas of life. It talks about great strategies, reinforce what we already know, supports efforts from all communities to be part of the solution. But it gets political- the author is a democrat who made a clear that he is anti-Trump. Something that was unnecessary and inappropriate. Talking about two sides coming together is a one thing but openly talking about his opinion about democratic and conservative party, makes this book less valuable. Too much politics in the context when he talks about taking politics out of the issue. Feel free to skip part three of this book and move to Appendix A.
August 6, 2019
Written in an easy-to-understand format, Bleeding Out gives a refreshing and honest look at urban violence and how to apply evidence-based strategies that work. The author's plan is action-oriented, and backed by solid research, not personal political ideology. However, Thomas Abt is not afraid to tackle the ideological viewpoints of both the "left" and "right" in the United States that tend to impede progress in reducing urban violence. Bleeding Out is "focused, balanced, and fair," and a must-read for anyone concerned with the the rise of urban violence and how to make a safer America.
April 24, 2022
Probably the best version of the argument for the focused deterrence/Ceasefire approach to urban violence. Most abolitionist/community-based folks will not agree with the centrality of law enforcement in the approach, but still an important read, if only offering a better short-term “reform” approach to a conventional police-centric model, potentially acting as a bridge to longer term approaches to public safety and flourishing that do not rely primarily upon police and other carceral approaches.
July 21, 2019
This book is on point in every respect to the research and best practices for violence prevention in vulnerable areas. Appendix A is especially useful for groups who have been in this space, but have not had the reach or impact they are looking to have.
The tone and some of side-bar comments started to get to me after a while. This book is like Micheal Shannon's character from 'The Shape of Water' reading you the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
March 11, 2020
A thoughtful collection of research and interviews. Abt does a good job synthesizing a wide range of research into a strategized plan of attack. While not all the information is new (particularly for those of us who do criminal justice work), and he doesn't go especially deep into any one topic, I did appreciate Abt's methodology and his application of the research he cites. He also does a great job of pulling in understandings of trauma and cycles of violence in ways that I appreciate.
May 1, 2023
3.5.
There's a convincing argument for public safety improvements here. It's worth reading for anyone interesting in urban violence to help shape a reasonable policy framework. But it left me wanting more: more stories, more options (and arguments against less effective methods), more evidence / academic research, etc.. It felt a little undeveloped in that regard. But I appreciated the singular focus on near-term violence prevention.
There's a convincing argument for public safety improvements here. It's worth reading for anyone interesting in urban violence to help shape a reasonable policy framework. But it left me wanting more: more stories, more options (and arguments against less effective methods), more evidence / academic research, etc.. It felt a little undeveloped in that regard. But I appreciated the singular focus on near-term violence prevention.
December 15, 2023
I’m currently pursuing a master’s degree in criminal justice and criminology and had to read this for a class. I’ve been studying criminal justice and criminology for over 4 years now and this is, by far, the best book I have ever read on the topic. It’s comprehensive, well-organized, and contains an incredible amount of information that can be understood by anyone, not just those in the field. I truly believe everybody who lives in the US should be required to read this book.
January 18, 2024
I hope DC implements this well researched evidence based strategy outlined in this book. It makes so much sense. And he explains how cost-effective it is. It’s a shame that politicians take such extreme stances that this plan would even be seen as controversial. The metaphor is illuminating: if someone is bleeding out, you don’t first offer them new clothes or a job, nor do you slap handcuffs on them, you just do what it takes to stop to bleeding.
December 11, 2019
Great book on what would be needed to reduce urban violence. The author uses evidence based reasoning to consider the factors, evaluate strategies which have and have not worked, and to formulate a best strategy moving forward. Even if some specifics may not be the best, the way of thinking that got to them is sound so this really is the kind of work people should be using to inform policy.
May 24, 2020
Urban Gun Violence Thinkers- This Is For You
One of the most thought provoking books on a topic that our society must address. I do not care where you hail from on this subject matter, Mr. Abt will engage your brain and judgment . There is wisdom here, will we be astute enough to apply it in your city?
One of the most thought provoking books on a topic that our society must address. I do not care where you hail from on this subject matter, Mr. Abt will engage your brain and judgment . There is wisdom here, will we be astute enough to apply it in your city?
July 11, 2020
A redirecting of attention needs to occur with gun violence. We need to help the most at risk people, Blacks and Latinos, who live in such conditions. We cant begin an anti poverty measure without it because of the constant fear looming over the lives of the respectful and hardworking individuals in such communities.
September 17, 2019
A really cool and different book, looking at a public heath and triage approach to violence. The book also breaks down the dollar by dollar cost of treating violence in this way. All told, it makes for an irrefutable argument for a public health approach to violence. Well worth a read.
October 7, 2019
Outstanding book on urban violence. He knows the what the research says and what the community says. The principles of focus, balance and fairness make sense and are backed by evidence. Rejecting simplistic solutions of the left and the right, He provides specific ideas to stop the violence.
July 30, 2021
Careful analysis of urban violence
Any idea the metaphor of triage to explore the difficulties and potential responses to urban violence. He moves beyond the headlines and simple responses to an in-depth analysis and holistic response.
Any idea the metaphor of triage to explore the difficulties and potential responses to urban violence. He moves beyond the headlines and simple responses to an in-depth analysis and holistic response.
May 13, 2023
Interesting policy implications and an authentic portrayal of people who face the brunt of urban violence + their consequences. However, you can tell this is from someone more versed in politics than criminology.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews