In Unforgiving Places Jens Ludwig makes a strong claim for the behavioral economics of crime, scoring it a knockout when pitted against conventional wisdom. Focusing on gun violence, he proposes a unifying explanation that draws on disciplines beyond economics, especially sociology, criminology, and psychology. Although the intended audience is mainly policymakers and the general public, scholars will benefit from reading Ludwig's thought-provoking book. In this essay, I evaluate the book's evidence and elaborate on the research needed to resolve unsettled hypotheses. I focus on several key issues, including linking self-control theory to cognitive processes, informal neighborhood social control, legitimacy in community policing, toxic environmental effects on cognition, the limits of administrative data, age-specific pathways of gun carrying, and the impact of social change. In the spirit of consilience that Unforgiving Places calls for, I argue that further engagement of the book's framework with these issues yields a promising research agenda.

James J. Heckman, John Eric Humphries, and Tim Kautz make a powerful case for noncognitive skills—or what they conceptualize as character—as an explanation of educational achievement and other important outcomes in life. They do so while exposing the myth of the GED, arguing that the GED harms its intended beneficiaries by failing to instill the character skills that predict adult success. Childhood interventions to build personal character, especially self-control, are emphasized. The Myth of Achievement Tests is a major contribution, but I integrate relevant research on crime and social control across the life course that motivates a more dynamic conceptualization of character. I also review evidence on the environment as a source of both cognitive and noncognitive skills, including exposure to concentrated deprivation, violence, and lead toxicity. Moreover, I review evidence suggesting that social reactions to character shape life chances in ways not reducible to individual propensities, such as changes in criminal-justice policy that created large cohort differentials in incarceration for the same underlying behaviors. Social context and the character of American society itself are thus central to fostering individual character—not just skills but the desire to conform. It follows that self-control and social control need to be better unified theoretically and in designing interventions.