The Crime and Safety Blind Spot: Are random acts of violence at an all-time high?

This is part of the “Crime and Safety Blind Spot” series, which presents an opportunity to understand various perspectives, entertain new ones, and consider different conclusions. Read the introduction and view other posts here.

** Updated crime data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been released since the start of this series, and the new figures are reflected in this post.**

INTRODUCTION

Incidents of random violence—whether a public shooting or a person suddenly and senselessly attacked by a stranger—frequently make headlines. For some, these events fuel claims that society is unraveling and crime is out of control. Others view them as a rare, but stark reminder of the urgent need to prioritize mental health responses or provide stronger safeguards to mitigate risk. In this post, we will explore various views, studies, and solutions related to random acts of violence.

EXPLORING KEY PERSPECTIVES AND BLIND SPOTS

What are random acts of violence crime trends?

A random act of violence is a violent incident that occurs without any apparent motive, pattern, or specific target. It can involve active shooters or seemingly random, unprovoked attacks on strangers. The following charts provide a nationwide view of random acts of violence from 2007-2023.

National Data collected from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Data compiled by Forbes Advisor and the JAMA Network.

Potential Blind Spot: Random acts of violence are not legally defined, making it difficult to track trends or pinpoint patterns. Definitions vary widely. For example, mass killings generally include a single incident with three or four or more victims; this may or may not include family members or the shooter themselves. Additionally, data on stranger violence is often incomplete due to factors like underreporting, low clearance rates, or gaps in police records, limiting the ability to fully understand the scope of these events.

What is the actual risk of becoming a victim of a random act of violence?

• Nearly half of respondents in a recent poll identified random acts of violence as the greatest threat to the safety of average Americans.
• National data on offender relationships reveals that only 22 percent of victims were harmed by someone they did not know. For women, that number is likely much lower—one study found that in cases where the victim-offender relationship is known, 92 percent of women killed were murdered by a man they knew.
• Unintentional injuries, such as car accidents, cause significantly more deaths each year than murders by strangers. In fact, stranger murders account for only a small fraction of total deaths annually.

Potential Blind Spot: Random acts of violence often feel more terrifying than the actual risk would suggest due to constant media amplification and our heightened fear of the uncontrollable. This distortion makes these rare events seem far more frequent and threatening than they actually are. That said, only about half of violent crimes are reported, and less than half of those are solved, making it difficult to get a clear and accurate picture of the statistics. In 2023, for instance, the victim-offender relationship was known or collected in just 42 percent of violent offenses. National victim surveys could provide more comprehensive data—showing stranger violence closer to 36 to 45 percent—but they also come with their own limitations and challenges.

Who is most likely to commit random acts of violence, and what common factors are present?

• The vast majority of random acts of violence are committed by men, with striking statistics like over 95 percent of active shooters being male.
• Research findings on the link between acts of violence and mental health disorders or substance use vary widely. However, some evidence suggests a heightened risk of violence among certain groups, such as those with co-occurring behavioral health issues or untreated schizophrenia.
• Active shooter incidents most often happen in businesses or open spaces. Similarly, random one-on-one acts of stranger violence tend to happen in public, in places like commercial settings, parking lots, or transportation systems.

Potential Blind Spot: Research on the causes of unprovoked aggression and violence is limited, but several areas show a potential correlation, such as a propensity for violence against women and underlying neurobiology. Because random acts of violence are so rare, studying them or developing predictive models is challenging. While some “risk factors” offer some insight, they are far from predictive. For example, for every homicide perpetrator with schizophrenia, thousands with similar profiles will never commit a crime. Similarly, though men commit most random acts of violence, the vast majority of men do not. However, gaps in psychiatric care that leave individuals on the streets and without necessary treatment may contribute to the small number of violent incidents.

What are governments and law enforcement agencies doing to prevent random acts of violence? 

• Increased police presence has long been shown to reduce violence. Recently, communities have responded to rising concerns about random acts of violence by deploying more Safety Resource Officers in schools and bolstering the presence of law enforcement—or even the national guard—in public transit.
• In an effort to prevent the random acts of violence before they happen, many communities have turned to co-responder models, red flag laws, and anonymous reporting systems like Safe2Tell. These efforts aim to deliver services, mitigate dangers, and proactively investigate potential threats.
• Research shows that the likelihood of being caught deters crime more effectively than the threat of punishment. To reduce repeat offenses, some communities are working to improve clearance rates—the percentage of crimes solved—as a strategy to combat random acts of violence.

Potential Blind Spot: Some crimes occur right in front of law enforcement, which throws uncertainty on whether the police presence is always the best deterrent, especially for random acts. With many crimes going unsolved, simply increasing the number of officers without improving investigative methods might not be the most effective strategy. Investing in social workers or mental health support could be more effective in preventing violence by addressing root causes. Additionally, ramping up police presence, if not done thoughtfully, can have unintended consequences, such as disproportionately impacting marginalized groups or misallocating public funds. Other efforts face challenges as well, such as Safe2Tell being misused for false reports or pranks—which diverts valuable resources—and red flag laws facing constitutional concerns, particularly around due process and Second Amendment rights.

R STREET’S PERSPECTIVE

Random acts of violence grab headlines, leading many communities to fear school shootings or attacks on subway platforms more than the comparatively common reality of violence from a partner or acquaintance. It is understandable—thanks to the availability heuristic, our brains believe these random acts occur more often than they do. The unpredictability and lack of control over strangers—as opposed to being able to choose who to date or spend time with—amplify that fear. It is not just the violent act itself that scares us; it is the randomness of it.

However—even with the increase in mass killing incidents—the reality is that stranger violence is very rare: It is far less common than violence from people we know and even rarer when compared to other risks like car accidents or cancer. But just because it is statistically uncommon does not mean we should ignore it.

While most violent crimes have a clear motive, random acts of violence can seem motiveless, making them harder to predict, but not necessarily impossible to prevent. To combat this issue effectively, we need better data collection and more robust research to understand the factors that lead to these events. Identifying patterns, however subtle, could help us develop targeted prevention strategies.

Regardless of the rarity of these events and the challenges of preventing them, the fear they instill in communities remains very real, as do the tragedies of lives lost to such senseless acts. Balancing the need to address fear and tragedies from these acts while tackling more widespread public safety issues requires thoughtful consideration.