Giving Compass' Take:
- Katya Migacheva and Jordan R. Reimer explain the important role of states in stopping mass shootings in a way that reflects and responds to local contexts.
- How are states uniquely well-positioned to take measures to prevent mass shootings? How can donors help build a culture of peace and justice?
- Learn about how funders can respond to mass shootings.
What is Giving Compass?
We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us.
Attacks like those in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, evoke a paradoxical mix of immediate disbelief and dread that yet another mass shooting feels inevitable. As the nation grapples with what to do, there are vehement calls for federal action on gun control, better access to mental health care, and more effective law enforcement.
This debate is currently focused on Washington, D.C. While federal action may be needed, it is state governments that might be best positioned to take the lead on long-term, sustainable efforts to prevent targeted violence.
Today, multiple organizations across the United States engage in specialized violence prevention efforts. Some organizations conduct active bystander trainings and teach communities (PDF) and schools about recognizing threats. Others implement trauma recovery programming and wraparound services for youth at risk. And others work on helping people disengage from hate groups.
While important and commendable, these efforts are often disjointed, underfunded and inaccessible to many who could benefit from them the most. We have interviewed dozens of practitioners in the field of violence prevention, and they repeatedly tell us that existing services do not come together in any sort of broader violence prevention strategy.
Read the full article about preventing mass shootings by Katya Migacheva and Jordan R. Reimer at RAND Corporation.