Every time a young life is lost to knife violence, Scotland asks itself the same question: who’s responsible? how did we get here? Politicians will debate whether we’re too soft on crime and radio chat show hosts will ask the questions that they have previously asked and will ask again unless we think differently.
The recent knife murders that have shocked communities across Scotland, alongside growing concerns about weapons being carried by children and young people in schools, have reignited debates about crime, punishment and public safety. The public response is often predictable. Calls grow louder for tougher sentencing, stronger enforcement, increased stop-and-search powers and more visible policing.
These responses are understandable. When violence takes a life, people want action, but Scotland has faced this challenge before and if we look back at one of the most successful periods of violence reduction in modern Scottish history, we are reminded of a powerful lesson: Scotland made its greatest progress when it fell in love with prevention.
A Different Way of Thinking
In the early 2000s, Scotland had a serious violence problem. Glasgow in particular had developed an international reputation for knife crime and gang violence. Homicide rates were significantly higher than they are today. Violent offending was seen by many as an unavoidable feature of certain communities. Scotland seemed to accept that violence was part of our DNA.
Then something changed. The Scottish Violence Reduction Unit (SVRU), established in 2005, challenged the traditional view that violence was simply a criminal justice problem to be solved through enforcement alone.
Instead, it promoted a radically different idea. Violence was not inevitable.
Violence was preventable.
The SVRU adopted what became known as a public health approach. This approach did not ignore personal responsibility or accountability. Rather, it recognised that violence often has identifiable causes and risk factors. If those factors could be understood and addressed early enough, violence could be prevented before it occurred. This represented a fundamental shift in thinking. Instead of asking, “How do we respond to violence?” the question became, “How do we stop violence developing in the first place?”
Looking Upstream
One of the most important concepts promoted by the SVRU was the idea of looking upstream. Imagine standing beside a river and seeing people drowning. One response is to keep pulling people from the water. That work is essential but eventually someone must walk upstream and ask why people are falling in. That is what prevention seeks to do. The public health approach recognised that violence often begins long before a weapon is carried.
It may begin with childhood trauma.
It may begin with neglect, abuse or instability.
It may begin with exclusion from education.
It may begin with poverty, hopelessness or a lack of opportunity.
It may begin with peer pressure or exposure to violence as a normal way of resolving conflict.
None of these factors excuse violence but understanding them helps us both see them and importantly prevent the violence. The SVRU’s message was simple: if we want fewer victims, fewer offenders and safer communities, we must address the conditions that make violence more likely. This message also has another purpose. It begins to help people see the benefits of prevention. Research suggests when people see benefits in something they often are more likely to buy into it.
Prevention Worked
The results were remarkable. Over the following decade, Scotland experienced substantial reductions in violent crime and homicide. Importantly these reductions were sustained.
Many factors contributed to this progress. No single organisation can claim sole responsibility. However, the influence of the prevention agenda was undeniable. Programmes such as No Knives Better Lives, Mentors in Violence Prevention, community outreach initiatives, youth engagement projects and hospital-based interventions all reflected the same philosophy. Rather than waiting until a young person appeared in court, efforts were focused on reaching them earlier.
Rather than seeing young people solely as potential offenders, they were viewed as individuals capable of making positive choices when given support, guidance and opportunity. The language of prevention became embedded across policing, education, health and community services.
Most importantly, Scotland developed a sense of optimism. Violence was no longer viewed as an unavoidable fact of life. It was viewed as something that could be reduced.
Why Prevention Matters Today
Recent events suggest that Scotland may need to rediscover some of that thinking. Every knife-related murder is a tragedy. Every report of a child carrying a weapon should concern us. Yet these incidents should not only trigger conversations about punishment they should trigger conversations about prevention.
When a young person arrives at school carrying a knife, the question should not simply be, “How should we punish them?” The question should also be,
What happened before this moment?
Were they frightened?
Were they being threatened?
Were they seeking status among peers?
Were there warning signs that were missed?
Were there opportunities for intervention that never happened?
By the time a weapon is discovered, prevention opportunities have often already been missed. The challenge is identifying those opportunities earlier.
Schools as Prevention Environments
Schools are among the most important prevention environments in society, not because teachers can solve violence alone but because schools are where young people spend a significant portion of their lives.
Schools shape relationships.
Schools shape identity.
Schools shape belonging.
A child who feels connected to their school, trusted by adults and valued by peers is often less vulnerable to the influences that can lead towards violence. This is why prevention cannot be reduced to security measures alone. Metal detectors, searches and disciplinary sanctions may sometimes be necessary, but they are downstream responses.
True prevention focuses on creating environments where carrying a weapon becomes unnecessary, undesirable and inconsistent with social norms. That requires relationships. It requires trust. It requires young people having adults who notice when something is wrong.
The Power of Active Bystandership
Perhaps one of the most overlooked lessons from Scotland’s prevention journey is the importance of active bystandership. Violence rarely emerges without warning. People often see the signs. Friends notice escalating conflict. Classmates hear threats. Teachers observe changes in behaviour. Parents sense something is wrong. Coaches recognise withdrawal or anger.
The challenge is not always recognising the problem. The challenge is acting. Active bystandership is about creating cultures where people feel both responsible and capable of intervening safely. Sometimes intervention means challenging harmful behaviour. Sometimes it means checking in with someone who appears distressed. Sometimes it means sharing information with someone who can help. Sometimes it simply means refusing to stay silent.
Many serious incidents are preceded by numerous moments where intervention was possible. The earlier those interventions occur, the greater the chance of preventing harm. This is why prevention is everybody’s business. Police cannot be everywhere. Teachers cannot see everything. Parents cannot know everything. Communities become safer when responsibility is shared.
Prevention Is Not Soft
One of the misunderstandings that occasionally emerges in discussions about violence is the belief that prevention is somehow a soft option.
It is not. Prevention is demanding. It requires patience. It requires long-term thinking. It requires investment in people long before results become visible. It asks organisations and communities to address difficult issues rather than simply react to crises. Prevention isn’t soft, its smart.
Enforcement remains essential. Those who commit serious violence must face consequences. Victims deserve justice. Communities deserve protection but enforcement alone cannot create safety. No society has ever arrested its way out of violence. Lasting reductions occur when prevention and enforcement work together.
Falling Back in Love with Prevention
The greatest achievement of the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit was not simply reducing violence it was how it changed the national conversation.
It encouraged Scotland to believe that violence was not inevitable. This vision helped people believe even the smallest actions make a difference. This mattered because once people believe something can be prevented, they begin looking for opportunities to prevent it. Such a belief comes from consistent communications across the country. This belief comes from seeing a role. This instils a sense of responsibility. Decades of social science research confirms this sense of responsibility is the biggest motivator that engages people.
Communities across Scotland currently find themselves being influenced by media stories and politicians. The SVRU needs to better own this narrative helping people to feel they are part of something bigger. Again this sense of unity motivates action.
In my opinion today, Scotland faces a choice. We can focus exclusively on reacting to violence after it occurs or we can recommit ourselves to the prevention mindset that delivered such significant progress between 2005 and 2019. The answer is not choosing prevention instead of enforcement. It is recognising that prevention is where the greatest opportunity lies.
Every life saved through prevention is a victim who never suffers. A family that never grieves. A young person who never enters the criminal justice system. A community that never experiences trauma.
The question is not whether Scotland can afford to invest in prevention. Investing in prevention benefits everyone. The question is whether Scotland can afford not to, because the safest society is not the one that responds best after violence occurs. It is the one that works hardest to ensure violence never happens in the first place.
grahamgoulden.com 