Melissa Ellis

3/29/15

Criminal America: A Tale of Every CityThe cases presented by each author are both poignant and well-illustrated. And I think it should be noted that these authors are describing two completely different worlds of Criminal America. The depiction of each is superficially accurate and both are supported by research and statistics. David A. Anderson is passionate in his stance regarding street crime as the more troublesome and costly to America’s communities, as well as to America as a whole. Then, Jeffrey Reiman does a fantastic dance of principle-related logic right on top of all of those numbers and facts that David Anderson worked so hard to lay out for us. But since I must choose a side, David Anderson gets my vote today. The information he provides is not just statistical in nature. David Anderson takes into consideration indirect costs such as: victim-related opportunity costs, the mental and emotional toll taken on victims and communities, and “…a transfer of assets from victim to criminal”, which shifts this discussion into personal territory (Anderson 274). For example, when breaking down the obvious costs associated with street-level crime, Anderson extends his study by including “…implicit psychic and health costs (fear, agony, and the inability to behave as desired)…” (Anderson 274). This illustrates the ripple effect that crime has on a community and those that live in it. Anderson even goes so far as to calculate and categorically organize the money that would not have been spent if the nation did not suffer from street-level crime, down to the dollar. It is not enough that Anderson tallied up our nation’s whopping $400 billion tab of expenditures but, gave us a play-by-play of “…the costs of goods and services that would not have to be produced in the absence of crime” (Anderson 275). As if this revelation alone was not enough to force us to ponder new ways to fight crime in our neighborhoods, Anderson digs deeper. He calls us out on the very existence of things “…that do not contribute to society except in their association with crime”; like the Taser I keep in the console of my truck (Anderson 274). See, personal. Anderson goes on to say “…time, money and material resources…could be used for the creation of benefits rather than the avoidance of harm” (Anderson 274). To me, this feels like a reprimand. A shame-on-us for allowing prisons and police provisions to soak up the resources meant to build schools and playgrounds for our children. I believe David Anderson’s article is more accurate a depiction of crime in the U.S. today. The personal associations he forces us to make with what would otherwise just be numbers on a page, doesn’t just raise our awareness of an issue, they allow us to recognize the relevance those numbers have in each of our lives. While Jeffrey Reiman’s argument is presented in a comprehensive fashion, and his facts probably paint as accurate a portrayal of white-collar crime in America as one could hope for, if there is no legitimacy to be had, then that oh-so-accurate portrayal is never even seen.

Works CitedAnderson, David A. "The Aggregate Burden of Crime." Finsterbusch, Kurt. Taking Sides: Clashing Views

on Controversial Social Issues. Dubuque, Iowa: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2005. 272-279. Print.

Reiman, Jeffrey. "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison." Finsterbusch, Kurt. Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Social Issues. Dubuque, Iowa: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2005. 280-284. Print.