Sharing Successful Strategies to Reduce Youth Gun Violence:
A Report on the AFSC Side Event at the Small Arms and
Light Weapons Review Conference
29 July 2006

What factors influence young people to carry guns? What projects or programs have been most effective in reducing youth gun use? How could a “Gun-Free Zone” that was successful in South Africa be implemented in East Brooklyn? How about the idea of using an elephant as a billboard for a public service announcement about gun violence?

These were some of the topics discussed at the Youth and Gun Violence: Addressing Supply and Demand workshop hosted by the American Friends Service Committee’s Conflict Resolution Program on Thursday, 29 July. Over forty people attended, including RevCon delegates and also youth and program staff of groups working to address gun violence in New York City. Participants compared different contexts in which youth gun violence is a problem and exchanged experiences and ideas to reduce youth gun use.

In interactive small group discussions, participants shared successful projects and practices:

• Armed groups: preventing entry and facilitating exit: Emphasized the need for early intervention and both practical and emotional alternatives to the use of violence, highlighting a program in Kenya that exchanged Nike sneakers for guns.
• Raising public awareness of the gun violence epidemic: A Bronx resident described using rap music to reach young people, and students from Staten Island discussed how youth advocate for change.
• Community Policing relations in areas of high violence: Participants compared experiences of community policing, noting that building trust was a critical challenge.
• Working with communities, churches, schools and families: Focused on engaging parents, local corporations, religious leaders, and educational figures.
• Filling the employment and recreational gap for youth: Found common frustrations regarding inadequate and talked about addressing this problem at the individual and structural level.

Responses from a follow-up survey indicated that participants appreciated the opportunity to learn from each other and to discuss their work in detail. One local participant noted, “The international perspective was great – it was interesting to see how we all face the same challenges, but that we use the resources at hand to deal with them.” Another respondent noted, “It was a great interactive meeting – I learned a lot!” The most common critique was that the workshop was too short to continue the interesting conversations.