Responds to D. Cantor and K. C. Land's (see record 1994-25914-001) answer to C. Hale and D. Sabbagh's (see record 1994-25923-001) critique of Cantor and Land's (1985) study on the unemployment–crime relationship. The author notes that the criticisms of Cantor and Land concerning levels of integration and dynamic misspecification might apply to other works that were used to support the structural model of the unemployment–crime relationship. Although these studies provide empirical support for the positive motivational impact of unemployment on crime, the author rejects the notion that they sustain the negative opportunity argument. The question of whether or not the rate of unemployment in the US has both a negative and positive impact on crime rates remains open. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)