Freakonomics and Gangs, Guns and Violence

Gangs are powerful. Getting involved in gang activity is easy, but getting out is sometimes not possible. In the documentary "On the Front Lines: Gangs, Guns and Violence" one girl said that many gang members don't live to see their 21st birthday, and if they do, they're behind bars. Gang activities range from violence and intimidation to the sales of illegal substances. On the Front Lines gives the perspective of the police on the outside looking in. They're doing everything they can to try and stop kids from becoming involved in gangs, but they're often too late or don't have the resourcest to do so. Many gang members are almost born into it. Their parents were involved, all of their friends are, so there's no way to stay out of trouble. On the front lines demonstrates this point through the testimony of former gang members about how getting involved was so easy. Freakonomics also makes this point when Levitt and Dubner talk about gangs in Chicago and how all of the members were like family. They grew up together and gang life was all they knew. Freakonomics demonstrates the power of gangs by comparing the organization of gang members to that of employees within a corporation. Members at the top make the big bucks, while the "foot soldiers" at the bottom make half of minimum wage. This only increases member involvement because they're all fighting to make it to the top.
When put together, Freakonomics and On the Front Lines work together to prove that gang activity is a major problem in urban America, but little can be done to stop it. This is due to how widespread the problem is, the power gangs have gained within their communities and the limited resources of our nation's law enforcement.
Both achieve this is different ways, but are effective. Freakonomics relies mainly on logos to make it's point, using facts and statistics to explaint the reasoning behind gang involvement. On the front lines, relies on the ethos of the government officials that are involved. Because it was visual, the audience views people such as the chief of police and the mayor of the focus community as more credible because they were seen in a positive light including nice clothes. It also relies on the credibility of former gang members to give and insider's view of what is going on. In additon, On the Front Lines relies on pathos. By showing photos of crime scenes, complete with blood and bodies, the viewer becomes emotional. Emotions also come through when member's of victims' families are interviewed about their experiences.
Though Freakonomics takes an indirect approach to addressing the problem with gangs by addressing the business side of their activites, Levitt and Dubner still include the underlying point that is very straightforward in On the Front Lines: Gang activity is a major problem and we need a new plan to stop it, because what we're doing right now isn't working.