Weapon ban zones (WBZs) are popular among practitioners and policymakers because of their symbolic impact on the public and their relative ease of implementation as hotspot policing tools. However, despite a large body of research on hotspot policing, the effectiveness of these zones remains unclear. Therefore, we examine whether introducing a WBZ in Leipzig, Germany, led to a reduction in crime or the spatial displacement of crime. From the standpoint of a dual-process perspective, we argue for a differentiated view of hotspot policing depending on the type of crime. We expect the WBZ to have a stronger effect on property offenses than on violent offenses. To test this assumption, we analyze the exact coordinates of all offenses committed in Leipzig during the 24 months before and the 24 months after the implementation of the WBZ. In addition to established methods at the aggregated level, we use kernel density estimation and hotspot analysis to gain a more in-depth understanding of crime movement. Our results mainly confirm our theoretical argument. While the WBZ had short-term crime-reducing effects on both types of crime, the effect was particularly pronounced for theft. However, its long-term effectiveness was limited. Displacement effects were evident for both violent and property crimes, though they exhibited different spatial patterns and persistence. Although some displacement occurred, violent offenses, which are often impulsive, did not clearly adapt to the intervention in the long term. In contrast, perpetrators of property crimes appeared to consciously adjust their behavior, avoiding enforcement areas while continuing to commit crimes elsewhere. Our research calls into question the general effectiveness of WBZs as a hotspot policing tool.