Research has indicated that the increased certainty of getting caught and harshness of punitive sanctions reduced the probability of involvement in continued criminality. However, the certainty of getting caught is subjective, since a rational person would assume that none would commit a crime if there were certainty of getting caught. Even if someone has never experienced the impulse to commit a crime, people make poor decisions regardless of the negative consequences. It is impossible for all choices to be based on economic gain, in fact, many people make choices knowing they will be at an economic loss. Rational Choice provides no context other than hedonistic gain for choices that satisfy an impulse, mood, craving, illness, preference …show more content…
Do differences exist between street crime and white-collar crime? Research has indicated that since public opinion is expressed toward the punishment of street crime, white-collar crime goes unresolved and impacts society far greater than street crime (Schaefer et.al.,2007, 03). When examining crime, the consideration must be given that all crime is not self-serving or …show more content…
Especially when considering violent and aggressive behaviors, (Shon, & Barton-Bellessa, 2015, 11). Ration Choice has little bearing in the explanation of impulse to commit a violent or aggressive act. If self-control is effective as a cognitive discipline, then a remedy should be mandated with offenders’ first brush with the law. Despite evidence that supports that individuals are not equally yoked; Rational Choice and punishment have served to fill our prisons beyond any other level of incarceration worldwide. Nonetheless, white-collar crime is predicated on the economics of gain and the majority of the benefits are increased finances. When considering the ability to calculate risk, exposure, and benefit of the success of crime, it is apparent that Rational Choice is embodied with white-collar criminality. The side effects of Rational Choice such as punishment as a deterrent does not serve those incapable of fully functioning rationality or improve the
375) and by using this hedonistic calculus people will refrain from committing crimes. This concept focuses on the punishment fitting the criminal and on preventing future crimes from occurring. The three most important factors in effectively deterring a criminal from further crimes are the severity of the punishment, the certainty of the punishment, and the swiftness of the punishment. If criminal doesn’t believe he will be punished or he feels the punishment is minor in comparison to the crime or if the punishment is not swift enough, then he/she will not be deterred from committing crimes. Studies on the effectiveness of deterrence have shown to be inconclusive. The deficient areas of deterrence are crimes committed in the heat of passions, crimes committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and the massive backlog of cases in the nation’s courts (Neubauer & Fradella, 2008).
Rational choice theory and social control theory both show why an individual may commit a criminal act, but they both also draw criticism of their approach. Rational choice theory critics point out that “The first problem with the theory has to do with explaining collective action. That is, if individuals simply base their actions on calculations of personal profit, why would they ever choose to do something that will benefit others more than themselves?” (Crossman, 2015). The theory focuses only on the individual’s mindset and doesn’t take into account any of their social structure. The society an individual grows up in may make them more prone to commit crime. Social control theory, in particular the study conducted by Travis Hirschi, also
White-collar crimes are just as prevalent today as ordinary street crimes. Studies show that criminal acts committed by white-collar criminals continue to increase due to unforeseen opportunities presented in the corporate world, but these crimes are often overlooked or minimally publicized in reference to criminal acts on the street. Many street crimes are viewed as unnecessary, horrendous crimes because they are committed by lower class citizens, whereas white collar crimes are illegal acts committed by seemingly respectable people whose occupational roles are considered successful and often admired by many (Piquero, 2014). These views often allow white collar crimes to “slip through the cracks” and carry lesser charges or punishment.
The rational choice theory gives insight in to why otherwise law abiding citizens would commit crime. Most burglars do not burglarize because they want something specific from the victim's property nor are they saving the cash proceeds for a long-term goal. They burglarize because they need the money right now to pay off bills, buy food and clothes for their family or to purchase alcohol and illegal drugs. Most burglars would turn to making an honest living, but, even that does not meet their immediate desires for cash. Nor would the earned wages support their lifestyles. (Wright & Decker, 1994).
This idea of a rational calculation of the advantages and disadvantages of crime runs parallel with the Rational Choice Theory offered to us by
Rational choice theory is predicated on the idea that crime is a matter of choice in which a potential criminal weighs the cost of committing an act against the potential benefits that might be gained (Siegel, 2011, p. 84). James Q. Wilson expands on this decision in his book Thinking About Crime, stating that “people who are likely to commit crime are unafraid of breaking the law
In our society there is many different types of crimes, I will be focusing specifically on street crime and white-collared crime. Each of these criminal communities has criminals that in the end are just trying to reach a goal. Whether it is the American dream of living in luxury or just trying to make ends meet. “White collared” crime is defined as a nonviolent criminal act that is motivated by financial gain. Then there is “street crime” which is defined as a criminal offense that is committed in a public place. Some examples of white-collar crimes are: embezzlement, corporate price-fixing, fraud, bribery, forgery, money laundering, cybercrime, copyright infringement, etc. While some examples of street crime are: robbing, murder, rape, sale of illegal drugs, assault, auto theft, etc.
There are, in fact, similarities between street crime and white-collar crime. Both commit criminal acts (usually in this case it involves stealing or some type of fraud) and they both commit these acts of violence when the opportunity presents itself (Barkan, 2012). But it is the differences that make these two types of crime so distinct.
Furthermore, criminal behaviour is learned, and when this behaviour is been taught, it entails techniques of committing the crime which at times can be complicated and other times quite simple; ' the specific direction of the motives, drives, rationalisation and attitudes.' (Newburn, 2013, pp. 394). Although this theory is rarely used when theorising white collar crime, it is nonetheless an important factor in many offending. For example, a study carried out by Geis of an electrical equipment company found that a lot of manufacture encouraged price fixing by their employee as a way of coping with market pressure. Geis pointed out that these activities was an established way of life where those that are involved learns attitudes and rationalisation that favour and support such misconduct. (Newburn, 2013). A second theory was given by Hirschi and Gottfredson, which is called the Self Control Theory. This theory focus on human nature and the significance of gratification. The central idea of this theory is that individuals peruse self interest and self gratification and the avoidance of pain. In regards to this theory crime is seen as a way in which individuals maximise pleasure and minimise pain. Furthermore, they argued that the differences that there are between those that chooses not to be involved in criminal activities and those that choose to
Initially, the main belief was that criminal behavior was based on rational choice or thought, where criminals were believed to be intelligent beings and weighed the pros and cons before deciding to commit a crime; classicists Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham introduced this view. Essentially, these criminals would compare the risks of committing the crime, such as getting caught, jail or prison time, being disowned by family and friends, and so forth; and the rewards, such as money and new possessions. After making comparisons, the person would make a decision based on whether the risk was greater than the reward. This is like what is presented in an article on Regis University Criminology Program’s website, which states that a criminal “operates based on free will and rational thought when choosing what and what not to do. But that simplistic view has given way to far more complicated theories” (“Biological Theories Primer”). Nowadays, biological theories make attempts in explaining criminal behavior in terms of factors that are primarily outside of the control of the individual.
The Classical School of Criminology was developed by two utilitarian philosophers, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham during the early 17th century. The Classical School of Criminology is an important theory in the framework of criminal behavior, with principle themes that include: criminal acts are of individuals free will and rational deliberation, calculating, and hedonistic beings. Criminals make a rational choice and choose criminal acts due to maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. As well as minimizing crime, the would be offender must be convinced that the likely punishment for the crime would be swift, certain and proportionately (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001, p. 11).
Quinney (1964), “Because the validity of white collar crime as a form of crime has been a subject of severe controversy, the question of conceptual clarity has largely been ignored. Today, as a result, the meaning of the concept is not always clear” (p208).
People chose all behavior and including all criminal behavior. Which in this case the choices that criminals make brings them pleasure and adrenaline. Criminal choices can be controlled by fear of punishment, but not all the time. The crime will be limited when the benefits are reduced and the costs increase. Rational choice theory is a perspective that holds criminality in the result of conscious choice. Not to mention, that it is predicted that individuals choose to commit crime when the benefits outweigh the costs of disobeying the law. In the rational choice theory, individuals are seen as motivated offenders by their needs, wants and goals that express their preferences. This theory has been applied to a wide of range in crime, such as robbery, drug use, vandalism, and white collar crime. Furthermore, rational choice theory had a revival in sociology in the early 1960s, under the heading of exchange theory, and by the end of the decade was having a renewed influence in criminology, first as control theory and later as routine activities theory.
This essay discusses Sutherland’s concept of white collar crime in the light of whether it is still appropriate in the 21st century. It is worth noting that white collar crime is often perceived as a less serious crime in the society. This is based on several reasons including the fact that the crime receives less media coverage. This incomprehensive media coverage of white collar crime may be attributed to the complex nature of the crime, which makes many incidences go unreported. In other words, it is often difficult to pin point one person as the perpetrator of the crime as it would happen with the case of robbery, knife crime, or drug trafficking. However, white crime remains a serious crime and one that can have serious negative
In 1939, American sociologist Edwin Sutherland introduced the phrase “white-collar crime”. White-collar crime is a nonviolent crime committed by a business or large corporations. They are usually scams or frauds to gain wealth in society. The people who are guilty of this crime lie, cheat and steal from investors of their company or business. Even though these crimes are non-violent, they have major impacts on the society. Their companies become non existent and families get destroyed. All of their life savings and savings for their children get taken away, and they become bankrupt. Not only does it affect their families, the investors who believed in their business lose millions or even billions of dollars.