Stick Talk: An Innovative Violence Intervention Approach

Disclaimer: This research was funded in part by The Annie E. Casey Foundation and the R Street Institute. We thank them for their support; however, the findings and conclusions presented in this report are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of these organizations.

In 1999, an epidemiologist named Gary Slutkin returned home to Chicago after spending most of his career treating infectious diseases in Africa. He soon noticed that patterns of urban violence in the city moved through neighborhoods like a contagion, the same way infected cells become nodes in a viral network. To stop the spread, Slutkin founded Cure Violence, one of the first Community Violence Intervention (CVI) programs.

Decades later, thousands of Chicagoans continue to fall victim to gun violence each year. In response, a new generation of Chicago CVI programs are innovating on the traditional model. One such group, Stick Talk, has developed a unique strategy using a survivor-centered approach that draws parallels to well-established public health interventions. 

Holistic Framework

Co-founder ethan ucker (who notates his name in lowercase) explains that young people often come to Stick Talk seeking tools to navigate the violence around them. He recalls one participant who could not shake the memory of a friend bleeding out in his arms, asking again and again, “What could I have done?” One of its offerings is to provide “street medic” training, which equips youth with the skills to save lives. Participants learn about emergency first aid—like how to tie a tourniquet—from partners with training in battlefield medicine.

After they are inside, the services extend well beyond first aid. The organization offers life skill support, including assistance with job applications and opening bank accounts, recognizing that economic opportunity is necessary for long-term stability and, ultimately, help with community safety. To incentivize participation, Stick Talk pays attendees a small stipend for their time, a practice that respects the challenging economic circumstances of their participants.

The organization’s work is rooted in restorative justice, creating a space for de-escalation, anger management, and conflict resolution. By focusing on repairing harm and rebuilding community ties, restorative practices effectively address the root causes of conflict, helping avoid retaliatory violence. Stick Talk takes a hyperlocal approach, working in small, unmarked “harm reduction hubs,” that allow those who feel targeted—either by rivals or the police—to come and go safely. These hubs foster peer support and open conversation in a decriminalized setting where participants do not feel judged or at risk. 

Stick Talk also provides legal education, teaching young people about their rights and how to navigate encounters with law enforcement. While they do not work directly with law enforcement, Stick Talk does partner with the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice to conduct workshops in Chicago’s juvenile detention center. Credible messengers conduct this work, mostly formerly incarcerated individuals who come from similar racial and socioeconomic backgrounds as the youth in detention. They provide practical skills and education to help young people who have firearm possession cases to understand the unhealthy mindset that drives violence. 

Innovative Strategy

The most controversial aspect of the Stick Talk model is its policy of allowing young people to keep their weapons. While well-intentioned, Stick Talk leaders believe abstinence-only models clash with the lived realities of inner-city youth. Research reveals that 5 percent of youth in the United States have carried a firearm, most for protection (not to commit a crime). To illustrate this point, ucker recounted the story of a young man who crossed gang territory to attend a local CVI program. Because the program enforced a strict “no firearms” policy, he would bury his gun in a nearby park before going in, and retrieve it after. 

“That young man was not just burying a gun; he was burying a part of himself,” ucker explained. 

Stick Talk does not teach participants how to shoot, but it does provide training in safe firearm handling, cleaning, and storage. Like more traditional forms of harm reduction, the goal is to provide nonjudgmental, noncoercive services focused on preserving life, allowing participants to be open and honest about risky or illegal behaviors. Evaluation of CVI programs find that trust, not coercion, is what opens the door to behavioral change among youth who have experienced chronic exposure to violence. This environment builds trust, so Stick Talk’s team of credible messengers are able to focus on alternatives to violence. The idea is that any young person can benefit, even if he or she is not fully ready to give up their old life. Stick Talk’s ultimate goal is not gun safety; it is community safety.

Owning a gun is illegal for people under 21 in Chicago, so providing firearm training to teens, many of whom carry guns illegally, has proven controversial. Critics argue that such training, even when focused on safety and de-escalation, could inadvertently normalize or even encourage gun possession. It is also worth noting that unlike illicit drug use, gun crimes hurt other people, calling into question the wisdom of applying a harm reduction framework to gun violence.

According to ucker, however, traditional violence intervention programs are not sufficiently independent, which compromises their ability to build trust in the community. His concern is that this has produced “credible messengers with un-credible messages,” that are ineffective at the population level. 

While Stick Talk has received national attention for its innovative approach and shares powerful participant testimonials, there is currently no rigorous, independent evaluation demonstrating measurable outcomes. This is not surprising, as Stick Talk is a relatively young initiative and prioritizes participant anonymity. A rigorous program evaluation could help assess the program’s impact, and inform future CVI programs on some of their novel strategies.

Conclusion

While “firearm harm reduction” remains a controversial idea, teaching a young person how to apply a tourniquet, find a job, manage an interpersonal conflict, or assert their legal rights is not. These kinds of practical interventions reduce risk, strengthen community stability, and create off-ramps before violence occurs. This is the core of the Stick Talk model: building trust, then providing the support and resources so that (hopefully) a young person does not need to carry a gun in the first place. The hope is that the next time a young man in Chicago buries his gun; he has the resilience necessary to leave it there.