Elizabethalsh
The best way to eliminate white collar crime is by eliminating or decreasing motivations for
committing white collar crimes, reducing the factors that help promote white collar crime and
reducing the surroundings that offer opportunities for white collar crime (Friedrichs, 2010).
When it comes to retributive approaches to reduce white collar crime, it is not completely
effective and suitable since corporations do not reflect, operate, and respond in the same way as
human beings do. However, I believe this is an effective strategy to reduce white collar crime
because it will punish the corporation or individual for the harm they have caused. Retribution
will deliver an appropriate punishment for those who break the law. Incapacitation refers to
sending the offender to prison with the purpose of preventing the offender from committing
future offenses. Depending on the crime committed, incapacitation may be an effective strategy
or not in reducing white collar crime. For example, if the crime did not cause much damage or
harm, then paying a fine will be okay and there will be no need for incapacitation.
Deterrence refers to abstaining from engaging in criminal and prohibited actions out of fear of
legal punishment. According to (Friedrichs, 2010), the time spent in prison did not make a
difference on offender’s later performance. In addition, corporations should be more receptive to
deterrence since corporations are frequently assumed to be more rational than traditional
individuals. Some people may agree that deterrence does not work for corporations or their
executives. In my opinion, deterrence is an effective strategy in reducing white collar crime and
works for both the corporation and the individual. When individuals and corporations think of
the penal system punishment, they will definitely be afraid of committing a crime. However, in
order for deterrence to work, legal sanctions must be tough. Rehabilitation seems to be the most
rationale for penal responses to crime. Rehabilitative programs have been providing convicted
offenders with the education and job training they need with the overall goal of once released
they will sustain themselves through legal jobs. In addition, according to different studies, a
supportive family, counseling, and group therapy have played an important role in the
rehabilitation process. As a result, I believe rehabilitation is an effective strategy to reduce white
collar crime.
Just deserts, is a model of punishment in which the criminal offender receives an appropriate
punishment depending on the type and severity of the crime committed. According to the book,
sanctions for corporate crime must be harsh to express the appropriate level of public
condemnation. I believe this model is effective and reasonable because it follows the
fundamental requirement of justice. Just deserts supports and restores important values of our
criminal justice system.
General deterrence is also an effective and reasonable strategy to reduce white collar crime
because it will convince potential offenders to abstain from illicit actions through the knowledge
of different penal systems and legal sanctions.
While in probation, offenders will be going through the process of rehabilitation. Offenders
under probation serve their sentence under supervision in the community. I believe this is an
effective strategy and reasonable since white collar criminals are not viewed as a direct physical
threat to the community. In addition, white collar offenders can still be part of the community as
productive employees. Many people believe that probation is a soft punishment; however, I
believe it all depends on the crime committed.
Self-regulation is when a corporation has a corporate inspector to examine the overall duties of
the organization and make sure that the laws are being met. Corporate inspectors are often better
trained than government inspectors, thus self-regulation may be a reasonable and effective
strategy. All in all, self-regulation can only be effective as long as the company’s executives and
employees are truly committed to do the right thing.
Fines can definitely be a reasonable and an effective strategy to reduce while collar crime since it
can be punitive and can discourage criminal acts. It can also be seem as a rehabilitate punishment
since the corporation or individual offender will have to pay for the harm done. Fines can be a
controversial topic because for some people it may not a significant deterrent effect. In addition,
excessive fines may be seen as an economic reason instead of punishment.
Restitution refers to the restoration and giving up anything that was illegally taken. It is a
reasonable strategy in reducing white collar crime; however, it is not an effective strategy in
reducing white collar crime. It may be economically efficient in reducing white collar crime.
However, depending on the crime it cannot be the only criminal sanction. There is more to the
economic portion of white collar crime; we need justice. All in all, depending on the crime
committed, restitution can’t be the only sanction given to a white collar criminal.
Community service refers to offenders working for the community at no cost. I believe this
punishment to be an effective and reasonable punishment since the offender will give back to the
community in a positive way without major costs. For example, according (Friedrichs, 2010),
physicians and lawyers can make a contribution by helping deprived organizations at no cost.
Occupation disqualification it’s a harsh punishment and intended as a deterrent. I believe this is a
rational and an effective strategy to reduce white collar crime since it will prevent individuals
from continuing illegal activities within the corporation. However, according to (Friedrichs,
2010), in order for occupation disqualification to be effective it must come from outside the
corporation.
Individuals and corporations have more fear of incarceration than any other penal punishment.
This type of punishment has a strong prevention effect on offenders. Depending on the crime
committed, incarceration may not be needed. According to (Friedrichs, 2010), it is wasteful to
send competent business professionals and well-educated people to prison because they could be
making beneficial contribution to society. I believe it is not a reasonable and an effective way of
reducing white collar crime: however, it highly depends on the crime.
Corporate dissolution can be an effective and reasonable strategy to reduce white collar crime, as
long as different measures are promoted such as: limiting corporate ownership, strengthening
certain corporation laws, requiring effective compliance programs and imposing legal
obligations to report corporations' activities.
Reference
Friedrichs, D.O. (2010). Trusted criminals: White-collar crime in contemporary society. (4thed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Purchase answer to see full
attachment