Authors of the article: TRAVIS HIRSCHI AND Michael Gottfredson

BASIC IDEA AND MAJOR THEORISTS

This article is about a theoretical examination of the believed conception of white-collar crime. It acknowledges facts of appropriate representations of white-collar crime and it lays out basic theories of crime beyond a reasonable doubt with common and white-collar crime. The approaches are analyzed with present reasons of white-collar crime, and various specific ideas of opposing views are defined. Furthermore, this article shows the similarities between white-collar crime and general crime. There are differences between specific crimes and general crimes. The differences are in areas that are not suitable. This article is related to rational choice theory because white-collar criminals are self-seeking, free thinking, rational decision makers who consider positive and negative consequences for their behaviour. People commit white collar crime because they have low self-control and they have the opportunity to engage in a crime that presents itself. White-collar criminals have the opportunity because they are in positions of power and trust. Having low self-control makes people pursue short term benefits and self interest without any remorse for their actions and the feelings of others. The rational choice theory and classical choice theory connect to each other because people choose to commit a crime based on weighing the benefits and the costs of a crime. When the crime benefits the offender then they will commit the crime. If they realize that committing the crime does not benefit the offender then they are more likely abort the crime. Overall, white-collar offenders commit a crime based on cost benefit analysis. Rational theory agrees with classical choice theory and states that it is about the opportunity to commit a crime. Travis Hirschi and Micheal Gottfredson apply rational choice theory to explain why people commit white-collar crimes. The theory is white-collar crime is an attempt to gain personal advantage over others. The cause is clearly self interest and it can be received directly or indirectly.  Hirschi and Gottfredson conclude on the fact that white-collar crime is carried out in high positions of significant purpose with trust and power that is given to the potential offender is what makes the white-collar crime possible. Once the potential offender has trust and power they will look for opportunity to commit a white-collar crime.

HUMANS, HUMAN NATURE, AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR

People commit white-collar crime based on rational choice theory because they want to maximize gain for themselves. “In classical theory, it was assumed that resort to force or fraud was an every present potential in human affairs. Both force and fraud was seen as means of pursuing self-interest.” (Hirschi and Gottfredson 1987). White-collar crime offenders clearly commit crime based on personal benefit. The benefit can come directly from the offender or from the organization or group in which they belong. Individuals or groups may abuse their positions within a company to hide or steal money. “White-collar crime can be committed by one individual like a car repairman charging for unnecessary work on a vehicle”. (Sutherland, 1983). Clearly, white collar criminals are rational decision makers and pursuing crime for their own gain. If the crime does not benefit the offender then he or she will not commit the crime because it has no personal benefit.

VIEW OF SOCIETY AND THE SOCIAL ORDER

            “Since crimes were attempts to gain personal advantage by force or fraud, they could obviously be committed by the rich and powerful, they could certainly involve force or fraud, and they could clearly be committed without punishment by the state”. (Hirsch and Gottfredson, 1987). Wealthy white-collar workers have power because “it was assumed that the poor really did have a high rate of crime compared to the rich and powerful, which was relatively crime free.” (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1987). Overall it states that there is more protection for the rich than the poor for protecting people from white-collar crime. Justice can be better served to you if you are rich and can hire a lawyer. The writers believe that white-collar workers have a lot of power in the society. White-collar crime happens only in occupying positions of power and influence. The writers also believe white-collar criminals are specialists in their field. This reinforces the fact that people who commit white-collar crime are in positions of power and they will get away from a crime with benefits and a lesser sentence. Based on social contract our society believes that we are a highly stratified in our hierarchy. People in society view high position workers in companies or businesses are viewed as successful in life and they don’t realize that they can commit white-collar crimes in the course of the job. The view on society is a theory that came from Hobbes. This theory is related to a social contract. People enter into contract agreements for their natural benefit. Also you are giving up your personal freedom to receive protection.

THE ROLE OF LAW, THE DEFINITION OF CRIME, AND THE IMAGE OF THE CRIMINAL

            “Absent such tests, scholars will continue to argue that the criminal justice system favours white-collar workers, that businesses protect them to maintain their own reputations, and that white-collar crime is relatively easily concealed”. (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1987). Since the law keeps while-collar crime concealed it is very difficult to see the statistics in white-collar crimes. Even official statistics and taken from police convictions against offenders. There is no way to full credit their evidence. However, the criminal justice system punishes white-collar offences under the same criteria governing punishments for other crimes. The article defines white collar crime as “crimes that can only be committed by persons occupying positions of power and influence. Also, “white-collar crime is an empirical reality as well as a conceptual possibility. (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1987). White-collar criminals see the benefits of the crime and weight it with the consequences. White-collar criminals are no different than ordinary criminals.  “White-collar crime is again no different from other crimes that occur in group or organizational settings where those in authority have more to say about what happens than those in subordinate positions”. (Hirsch and Gottfredson, 1987).  Hirschi and Gottfredson in this article discuss white-collar criminals as being no different than us because we are self-seeking people who look for our own personal benefit towards everything we do. For example, a lawyer deposits his clients money into his trust accounts. The lawyer should have put the money into a trust account but he was looking for personal gain by fraud or force. Classical and rational choice theorists believe that white-collar offenders are the same as us because every crime they commit gives them an advantage directly or indirectly. Classical and rational theorists think that it does not matter who you are because if you commit a crime you will be punished equally as others. The punishment should be the same for everyone. For example, the offender has committed forgery and should only be punished for forgery; it should not be based on the offender’s financial status or gender. They also say that we need to separate crime. If there is no victim for a crime then it should not be considered a crime. For example, if you are gambling illegally then you are only harming yourself. It should not be a crime because you are harming yourself and there is no victim connected to that crime. “Age-sex-race differences in opportunity do don’t reveal differences in the correlates of white-collar and ordinary crime. (Sutherland, 1983). Yes there should be a punishment for a specific crime classical and rational choice theorists believe that law should prescribe specific punishments for specific crimes.

CAUSAL LOGIC

Based on rational choice theory, humans choose crime on a cost and benefit situation. People break the law because they think that it could potentially advance their own interests. In this theory, humans might be tempted to break the law and will take into consideration the positive and negative consequences of his or her actions. For example a person could commit a crime where he or she has given a substantial benefit and the benefit is more than the punishment. Furthermore, humans are rational beings and they are fully aware of their behaviour. This is routine activities and there are three components. “Events do have distinct sets of causes (for example, autos are necessary for auto theft”. (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1986). A motivated offender will steal a car because it fulfills his own personal interests. If a car is left unattended in good condition then it will become a suitable target for the potential offender. If the doors are unlocked on a motor vehicle and the keys are in the ignition then the offender will look if anyone is guarding the car. If it is unguarded then there is a good chance it will get stolen. There has to be three components of causality in place for crimes to occur. If a motivated offender sees a car as a suitable target they will steal it because it is unguarded. The white-collar offender clearly seeks personal benefit. Before a white-collar criminal commits a crime they do a cost benefit analysis they will not commit the crime. If the cost benefit is in the offender favour then they will commit the crime. This reinforces the concept that humans are rational choice thinkers. The rational choice theory states that it is more difficult for a crime to occur if there are five components of causality are present: (1) Free choice (2) lack of fear of punishment (3) ineffective criminal justice system (4) available unguarded target (5) a situation with an opportunity presents itself. Travis Hirschi and Micheal Gottfredson understand that the life style one leads may make one more exposed to crime.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPLICATIONS

Hirschi and Gottfredson think that everyone in society should be treated equally by due process model. You will be treated equally before for law for the same crime. It does not matter about your race, national or ethic origin, color, religion, age, sex, marital status, family status,  or if you were pardoned of criminal conviction. If you committed the crime, then you should be punished. The punishment is the same for everyone because we all get treated equally before the law. If someone gets another way of treatment outside of what is justifiable then it disturbs the whole balance. “Good research shows that criminal justice systems punishments for white-collar offences are governed by the same criteria governing punishments for other crimes” (Wheeler, Wesisburd, and Bode, 1982). White-collar criminals get equal treatment as compared to other crimes. It does not matter what crime you commit it will be subject to equal punishment. A crime is breaking of the law; therefore, the law system is in place for punishing people who break the law and it applies to all. “You can construct a building in a way to reduce crime…” Newman states this point in professor Alexander Shvarts lecture on rational choice theory. (Shvarts, Alexander. 2009).  “Vandalism may be reduced by banning the sale of paint in aerosol cans” (Hirschi and Gottfredson, 1987: 950). Using rational choice theory we try to change the environment because we want to make crime more difficult and costly to the offenders who commit crime. Criminals will look for other alternatives where they can commit crime again.

Evaluation

Classical theory led to legal reforms for Canada’s legal system and you would get treated equally before the law. Due process model has been adopted in Canada’s legal system for dealing with criminals. Hirschi and Gottfredson argue that offenders of white-collar crime purse self-interest; they commonly take advantage of the most available opportunities. People will commit a white-collar crime for themselves based upon rational choice. Humans are independent in their behaviour and free thinking. “If a friend uses you then you will leave because they do nothing for you in return” (Shvarts, 2009). The friend in this quote never gave anything back in return as a result forcing them to leave. Criminals or non criminals seek personal benefits throughout life and we are self-seeking.  Hirschi and Gottfredson used rational choice theory to show that people commit white-collar crime because people choose crime by weighing the consequences of the criminal justice system and the restraints of the costs in opportunity situations. It was an effective approach because it clearly covers all the necessary aspects and it explains why white-collar criminals commit crime. Furthermore, it was an effective approach because white-collar crime is an important area of criminology. There are a lot of costs and benefits for the idea that white-collar crime is an organized form of crime.

CRITICISM

The authors of the article ‘Causes of White-collar Crime’ applied rational choice theory to white-collar crime by identifying humans as free thinking and self-seeking individuals who consider their own benefits over others. They suggest that people weigh the consequences of criminal activities and they seek opportunity for committing a crime. “Criminality is the tendency of individuals to pursue short term gratification in the most direct way with little consideration for the long-term consequences of their acts”. (Hirschi and Gottfredson 1987). People high on this tendency are relatively unable or unwilling to delay gratification; they are relatively indifferent to punishment and to the interest of others. This approach is lacking in criminality, we need to make justice more visible, certain and swift.  People need to know that they will be caught, convicted and punished for their criminal act. If we have more visible authorities in organization and business then the potential criminal will be more cautious in committing a crime. I would suggest regulating the work of people in high positions of power because they will use their power as a way to commit white-collar crimes. The acts of white-collar crime are intentional, and most of the time it is challenging to do. We need to find a way to rehabilitate white-collar criminals back in to society as law abiding citizens. One possible solution is to offer the white-collar criminals a chance to go to rehabilitation centres. At the centre they will first need to understand that they have a problem. Then they could go through various activities to make them law abiding citizen again. The rational choice theory explains that people commit crime by weighing the consequences of the criminal justice system and the obstacles that arise in situations of criminal opportunity. Hirschi and Gottfredson are missing how personal experiences in life contribute to committing crime. Personal experiences in life can shape the way you behave and think towards committing a crime. For example if you are constantly told that stealing from organization or business throughout life is wrong then you will not steal from organizations or businesses because it has been explained to you to be improper. I would suggest the authors take personal experiences into consideration next time when conducting theories.

REFERENCES

-Shvarts, Alexander. 2009. Lecture on rational choice theory.

-Clinard and Quinney, 1973: 188

-Causes of white-collar crime, Travis Hirschi and Michael Gottfredson 1987, volume 25 andnumber 4. University of Arizona. 

-Sutherland, 1983: 7

-Sutherland, Edwin. 1983.  White-Collar Crime: The Uncut Version. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

-Criminology A Canadian Perspective, Rick Linden, 2009, 6th edition

An action that is considered to be an offense committed by an individual, group, or organization using the means available through a company or government office.

Ten Examples of White Collar Crime:

Substandard labor conditions – sweatshops
Health hazards in working areas
Unlicensed people allowed performing specific duties – unlicensed vet performing surgery.
Counterfeiting
Insider Trading
Forgery
Tax Evasion
Bribery
Black Mail
Insurance Fraud

What can be seen is that it stands in stark contrast to “street crimes” or the more emotional crimes such as murder, rape, and kidnapping.  Even if a crime such as murder occurs under this definition, it can be considered white-collar if the motivation is found to be in relation to the workplace, such as going to such a length to keep someone quiet or to make sure that their level of intimidation is known to others.  An individual or group or whole company may commit this type of crime. 

The psychological findings for such individuals to commit crimes when it is believed that their jobs are satisfactory salary wise for decent living standards falls into the same patterns of deviancy as other criminals.  Sutherland believed that differential association worked on a number of levels from gangs and new recruits, to workers influencing each other, to anyone learning a trait from someone else mixed with measuring the benefits and costs of such actions. If the benefits outweighed the costs it would take, then the crime is worth the effort. 

The term white-collar stems from the white shirts many males in professional businesses wear with their suits.  These crimes are often undetectable, not punished to the same degree as violent crimes, and do not arouse the same emotions as other forms of crime. 

To put simply:  

(example A) a person can be robbed on the street – they lose their wallet and everything in it.  Their present financial situation takes a blow.  This would be called a street crime.  
(example B) a company is faulted for insider trading and saving those employees and trusted ‘friends’ from losing money in their shares.  These privileged few sell their shares to save their money.  The rest of the shareholders who are not aware of the underhanded and deviancy of the company’s employees find that their stocks have failed, their money is lost, and their future was stolen.  This is white-collar crime.  

White-collar crimes can steal your future from you, whereas a mugging or robbery just takes your present.

Historical example:

Herbert Hoover was the Director of the FBI, not by his own integrity. The list of illegal practices that he did while he was in this position could all be summed up as abuse and misuse of power and privileges. He was a gangster just like the ones he associated himself with.

Short list of his crimes:

1. Befriended the mafia heads for several purposes as well as kept them from being targeted by FBI and other gov. offices.
2. Undermined the efforts of the FBI to do their job, presented the organization as one of hiring intelligent, ethical people yet, he was not.
3. Fraud
4. Used gov. property for his own comfort such as having the FBI car with a chauffer drive him and his associate to work and lunch everyday.
5. Taxpaying money paid for the limo service and for his vacations to Florida and California under the deception that these were not for fun but rather for work. Meanwhile, he was hanging out with organized crime heads.
6. Used the FBI agents to do home improvement.
7. Abuse of the FBI resources available such as having the crime lab examine the animal feces that was on his patio.
8. Gave the public the image that the FBI was cleaning up the streets of the gangsters meanwhile the real threat was the growing mafia and they were immune.
9. Hoover would make bets off the racetrack, which was illegal.
10. Had knowledge of stocks, insider trading.
11. Hoover openly displayed his prejudice and bigotry towards ideals- and ideas- black progressive movements by such men like Martin Luther King and also did not like the feminist movements that were growing.
12. His arrest for picking up a male prostitute somehow disappeared due to his position of power.
13. His personal life and sexuality was blackmail against him due to the stigma at the time- this in turn gave the mafia power over him. So they worked together.
14. He snooped – would wire tap or phone tap the lines of other influential and rich people – had files on them and could use it as blackmail such as he did with JFK.
17. LBJ and Hoover had a friendship, which may have contributed to the death of JFK and LBJ’s VP position and later presidency.
18. Hoover would not cooperate well with Robert Kennedy, when Hoover seemed to be losing control over his position to not touch the mafia rings – he sent memos to Robert Kennedy about JFK’s womanizing as a form of blackmail.
19. Hoover promoted one agent through what was seen as favoritism – probably due to the fact that they were a homosexual couple.
20. Intimidated LBJ and Nixon and neither one would call for his retirement; instead they would continue to keep him in his position until he died.

Image via Wikipedia

I read every day about someone trying to cheat the system. It goes from cheating on tests to trying to rob a bank. Have people’s values sunk so low that they just don’t care about the system?

The system is the laws and rules we have in place to keep things peaceful, and stable.  The exact opposite of this would be anarchy and the criminalization of society.

The whole point for rules is to protect people from bad things like murders, or bank robbers or to a lesser extent cheating on tests. It all started for me when I was in Junior High school. Some kid wanted to cheat off of me because I was good at taking tests, English for smart. I told my mom this one day and she said, “You shouldn’t let other people steal off of your work. Let them fail and let society deal with them. But of course these students were my friends. How does one stop a friend from cheating without losing that friend?

Well over the years I learned that these were not friends these were people who would go home do no homework party all night and use me for information.

I started to wonder, “Where have our values gone?” That these creeps can have a social life and not worry about failing a class because they cheated off of someone, well, it was mind numbing.

Then I got into high school where cheating was the norm. I continued studying my brains off and doing tons of homework while these guys partied and did the littlest possible. Then one day I got into a college. You had to sign a contract that said you could not and refused to cheat. A few of my so called friends followed me to college and started doing the cheating game. Only problem was that the professor knew about it and threw those kids out of the class. In the end, these bad apples got thrown out of the college and it made us kids who had no life and had studied for so long feel vindicated. In our commitment to education, the old way, we had learned that finally someone was paying attention and our forced social hibernation was finally paying off.

I go back to our talking about the system’s society values and morals. Where have they gone? It is not such a bad leap from school cheating, to White Collar Crime to actual Street Crime. What has to be remembered is that society has to find these school bad apples, first, and fix them before they become the bad apples of society. I guess that’s my point. We need a reexamination of society in schools to make the society of tomorrow. If you’re studying hard and a lot of other kids are just copying off of you what does this say about their future.

A lot of people get molded into the people of today due to experiences in school. If they cheat, watch out for white collar crimes. If they feel they don’t fit in, they will quit school and become hard core criminals. The system needs to be reexamined.

 Maybe we should be teaching morality, catch cheaters early, try and reach failing kids, and not just school work? Schools are our young kid’s society. A lot can go wrong at an early age. Where are we on fixing this?