The empirical observation that a small number of micro places generate the bulk of urban crime problems has become a criminological axiom. Explanations for the persistence of high-crime places have traditionally drawn upon opportunity theories of crime. In a new book, Weisburd, Groff, and Yang suggest that social disorganization could also be a powerful explanation for the uneven distribution of crime within neighborhoods. In this article, we explain briefly why their empirical work considerably sharpens knowledge about crime concentrations in the city. We then offer a critique of their conclusions concerning the relative contributions of social and situational variables in explaining crime hot spots and the preventive implications they draw from these findings. Finally, we suggest new research that could invigorate the debate on the formation and persistence of high-crime places and could support interventions that seek to change the situational precipitators and facilitators of crime.