According to Koopman (2014), peace is shaped by the spaces in which it is made. Can we say in a similar fashion that research is shaped by the spaces in which it is carried out? Peace accords that are drafted in small rooms with closed doors involving few high-ranking persons do not have the same effect as those formed through large platforms that link many networks from different spaces and levels. Could we extend these observations to research? What is the effect of the spaces in which research is carried out on its outcomes? Does research that involves the participation of many people in semi-public spaces have a different effect than research carried out in a one-to-one setting behind closed doors? That has been one of the hypotheses behind my choice to create spaces for debate as a research method for my thesis carried out in a double context of urban and terrorist violence in marginalized neighborhoods in France. In this paper I explore how the creation of spaces of speech helped to meet the conditions to make speech possible, ethical, and political. A space of speech refers to a space in which speech becomes possible because it is configured in such a way that power dynamics are mitigated. In this space a public comes together and exchanges with each other about a specific theme. It belongs to the public sphere and is publicly accessible; it may form in public space but is more often a space that is closed by walls and a door as this closure offers a form of protection and separates the space from the street.