New Polling Reveals Robust Support For Community Violence Intervention Programs
Safer Cities recently conducted a national survey of 2,400 registered voters to gauge public support for community violence intervention. Here are the results:
1. Voters Believe Community Violence Intervention Is An Effective Tool For Making Communities Safer.
The Question: How effective do you think offices of community violence intervention are as a method of making your community safer? [see full question]
Results:
65% Effective
28% Not Effective
7% Don’t Know
2. More voters rate each message in support of investments into community violence intervention as convincing than any of the messages advocating for investments in hiring more police officers instead.
The question (in support of investing in CVI): Below are a few statements about the effectiveness of offices of community violence intervention. How convincing, if at all, is each of the following reasons for implementing an office of community violence intervention as a public safety policy?
81% convincing: “Most gun violence isn’t random. Instead, it often spreads through small groups of people who know each other. Community violence intervention specialists focus on these small networks likely to be a victim or perpetrator and then work to identify and de-escalate conflicts before tension boils over into gun violence.”
79% convincing: “Police officers don’t get invited inside homes and other private spaces where conflicts boil over into violence. But community violence intervention specialists do because they live in and are members of the community. Community violence interrupters get access to information about conflicts before they boil over and are credible messengers who are able to diffuse conflicts before violence erupts.”
77% convincing: “Whether it’s after-school tutoring and mentoring, or a stable job, community violence interruption works by preventing people at risk of being either a victim or perpetrator of gun violence from pulling the trigger in the first place.”
We also tested how convincing voters find real messages that opponents of community violence intervention programs use to discredit them. In short, voters find opponents’ messages convincing in isolation, but not as convincing as they find the arguments in support of community violence intervention.
The question (in support of investing in hiring more police officers instead): Below are a few statements about the effectiveness of investing more in police departments instead of offices of community violence intervention. How convincing, if at all, is each of the following reasons for investing more in police departments?
71% convincing: There’s a reason crime is down this year—we invested in putting more police on the street. Police make our communities safer, not offices of community violence intervention. We need to stay the course and support the investment we’ve made in increasing the size of police departments.
60% convincing: Community safety reforms are just another way to diminish the value of more police. Our cities and communities are at a crisis point. Too many people criticize police and other first responders, creating a combative environment between police and communities. Offices of community violence intervention are just another way of undermining trust in police.
57% convincing: There’s no need to implement alternative approaches to community safety. We all know what makes cities safer: more police. Police officers and other first responders are more than capable of solving the problems facing our communities. We need to invest in police departments, not offices of community violence intervention.
3. Despite exposure to powerful opposition messages, voters would prefer to spend surplus budget dollars on community violence intervention over hiring more police officers.
The question: Knowing what you know now about offices of community violence intervention, if your city or community was looking to invest additional funding to make your city safer, would you prefer that they:
Results:
48% Spend on CVI
42% Spend on hiring more police officers
10% Don’t know
