Category: Crime

Introduction

Hate crime is a violation of the law and is represented by the affiliation of the victim with a particular social group related to the different ethnicity, sexual orientation, or race (Gernstenfeld, 2013). The presence of hate crimes in the legislation is linked to the Civil Rights Movement and prosecutes the cases, which do not comply with principles of tolerance and equality (Gernstenfeld, 2013).

In the past, the United States of America proposed various Codes such as Acts 241 and 242 to minimize the occurrence of hate crimes and ensure that all social groups can be engaged freely in everyday activities (Gernstenfeld, 2013). Nonetheless, these laws were modified. Nowadays, they clearly differentiate the main features of hate crimes and affect the ability of the prosecutor to go to court. Consequently, the primary goal of this paper is to highlight the aspects, which affect the law enforcement’s response and district attorney’s understanding of hate crimes.

Discussion and the ability of the prosecutor to participate in the lawsuits

In the first place, the legal authorities tend to have distinct categories, which can be reported as hate crimes such as racial or gender discrimination (Gernstenfeld, 2013). At the same time, the modern law has a clear definition of hate crime to ease the decision-making process (Gernstenfeld, 2013). As it was mentioned earlier, a hate crime is a conflict of interests associated with prejudice and people’s belonging to the particular social groups (Hall, Corb, & Gianassi, 2014). In this case, the crime pertains to the intergroup clash of interests and usually involves a high level of violence.

The correspondence with any features of the hate crime identified above determines the ability of the prosecutor to report the detected violation to the court. Consequently, it could be said that law enforcement’s response and defining the nature of the crimes determines the prosecutor’s participation in the proceedings. Despite the vitality of the legal definition of hate crime, the desire of the victim to participate in the lawsuits also affects the prosecutor’s involvement. In this case, the feelings such as shame for being victimized might be another determinant of the victim’s and prosecutor’s actions.

Issues and the victim

On the contrary, there is a plethora of issues, which affect the involvement of the prosecutor in the investigation process of the hate crime. Discovering the actual motives of the crime might impact the overall process and define the typology of the incident (Gernstenfeld, 2013). In turn, the victim’s race or sexual orientation may also influence the decision-making and display whether the violation complies with any categories of hate crime.

Furthermore, the victim’s ability to persuade the prosecutor and develop sympathetic feelings can be viewed as another factor, which has an impact on the investigation process (Gernstenfeld, 2013). A combination of these aspects pertains to the fact that the viewpoint of the prosecutor can be biased by the individual preferences and social opinions. In this case, improving the law enforcement strategies and clearly defining the core features of hate crimes will help avoid misconceptions and ease the decision-making process.

Conclusion

In the end, the analysis conducted above displays that it is challenging to differentiate hate crime from other violations and criminal acts. Nonetheless, the modern legislation tends to ease the decision-making process and defines the key characteristics of the crime. Nevertheless, despite the vitality of the law enforcement, the victim’s ability to report the details and continue the process in the court also affects the prosecutor’s actions. Thus, individual opinions, social viewpoints, and the compliance of the identified crime with the law can be viewed as the definers of the flow of subsequent investigation.

References

Gernstenfeld, P. (2013). Crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Hall, N., Corb, A., & Gianassi, P. (2014). The Routledge international handbook on hate crime. New York, NY: Routledge.

Introduction

Hate crime can be defined as a criminal act in which the offender is fully or partially motivated by the ethnicity, race, gender, religion, or other types of affiliation of a victim. Even though the criminal act might not be inspired by hatred, it still can be recognized as a hate crime (Gerstenfeld, 2013). Some of the criminal offenses such as gang violence, political violence, and terrorism can also fall under the definition of hate crime.

It is important to realize that the line between an unlawful act and an act of bias is sometimes so narrow that it is hard to distinguish between the two. For example, there are some ways of exercising freedom of speech that might seem like hate crimes but could be protected under the First Amendment. On the other hand, some cases are explicitly prohibited under the hate crime laws (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

The need for the hate crime legislation has risen dramatically when a group of white supremacists called the National Socialist Party of America (NSPA) started organizing a demonstration in Skokie village, Illinois in 1977 (Gerstenfeld, 2013). The locals protested against the event, and the neo-Nazi group was denied the necessary permits for the rally. It was noticed by the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL) that recorded increasing incidence rates of anti-Semitism across the United States (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

The ADL persuaded Oregon and Washington states to pass the laws prohibiting hate crimes. Similar legislation was passed in 34 states and the District of Columbia by 1994 (Gerstenfeld, 2013). Due to the efforts of the ADL and other similar organizations, almost all US states enacted “penalty-enhancement-type laws” (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

Existing Crime Legislation

There are some substantial differences between existing crime legislations in various states. Some states have only the penalty enhancing laws that can increase a sentence for offenses motivated by hatred. In some cases, they might be doubled or even tripled (Gerstenfeld, 2013). Those laws can lead to severe legal implications for the perpetrators of bias-driven crimes reclassifying the offenses as felonies. However, some states treat hate crimes differently and recognize separate substantive offenses that can result in a supplementary conviction.

Therefore, in addition to the punishment for the underlying crime, the defendant might receive other penalties. Moreover, whereas some states regard any bias-driven offenses as hate crimes, others have certain restrictions that limit them to harassment, assault, and vandalism among others (Gerstenfeld, 2013). Some states have made the inclusion of the specific choice of language based on the group affiliation of the victim chosen by the perpetrator in their hate crime legislation. Whereas, other states require that prejudice should be “manifested” or “demonstrated” (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

There is also a difference in the inclusion of various groups into the hate crime laws. For example, religious, ethnic, and racial affiliations are covered by all statutes. Whereas, sexual orientation is enumerated in only 31 state statutes. The gender groups or groups with physical disabilities are included only in 27 and 31 statutes, respectively (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

Arguments for Having Hate Crime Laws

The majority of arguments for having hate crime laws can be placed into three categories: deterrence, retribution, and symbolic effects. The deterrent effects of the legislation against hate crimes is the main concern of those who claim that it can be effective in discouraging people from perpetrating offenses motivated by hatred (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

Adherents of this argument believe that potential offenders would better consider the risks and benefits associated with committing a hate crime if they were versed in the hate crime legislation and, hence, were aware of possible legal consequences. The retribution argument is concerned with the severity of hate crimes and states that bigots have to be punished more severely than other offenders. Those who adhere to this view believe that offenses motivated by hatred cause more psychological damage to their victims in comparison with other unlawful acts (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

This argument is focused on the belief that the emotional state of those who have suffered hate crimes tends to worsen over time. However, there is no substantial evidence to support this claim empirically. Another argument that falls in the retribution category is concerned with the severity of physical trauma experienced by victims of hate crimes. The proponents of this belief state that illegal acts motivated by hatred “tend to be excessively brutal” (Gerstenfeld, 2013). Unfortunately, the data that supports this view is even more scarce than that for the psychological argument.

There are other assertions concerning a wide impact of hate crimes. According to those who argue about the extended influence of such offenses, their repercussion could go beyond the victims themselves and might cause a ripple effect across entire neighborhoods. For example, a swastika painted on a synagogue might negatively impact not only one particular congregation but the whole Jewish community of a town.

I would argue that some hate crimes can negatively impact the entire culture of a country poisoning it from within; therefore, there is a need for hate crime legislation that would punish those offenses. Another argument for such laws is their symbolic or denunciatory effect. It is aimed at preserving the social fabric of the country that has particular social norms prohibiting crimes motivated by hatred (Gerstenfeld, 2013).

Reference

Gerstenfeld, P. (2013). Hate crimes (3^rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Introduction

School violence is on the toll in the United States with children being the most frequent victims than any other age group in America. The very concept of school violence is multidimensional and includes violence victimization, antisocial behavior, criminal behavior, perpetration of violence, and other aspects.

Multiple procedures are used to determine the reasons for school violence and accurately assess current and expected crime rates. While statistics are usually provided by official federal agencies, student self-reports are the primary source of statistical data. Student self-reports are then checked on validity and reliability. It has been determined that reported incidence of school violence are much higher among students that fail to pass reliability tests. For instance, the frequency of school fighting was 19.2% percent among students that pass the reliability tests with school frequency rising to 58.6% among those who fail to pass the tests. The statistics suggest that the present rate of school violence is, in fact, lower than the one estimated by the general studies.

Problem overview

Overall, youth violence in the United States has been steadily increasing for the past fifteen years with homicide being the second leading cause of death among youth ages 15 – 24 and African Americans being the most vulnerable group. The rate of annual arrests for weapons carrying among youth has increased by 104%. Despite the general increase in crime rates among youth, little violence reported for children occurs within the boundaries of schools. It has been estimated that the school homicide rate is approximately one in a million, whereas chances of violent death among juveniles are as much as 40 times as higher as in schools. Within 1 year, from 1999 to 2000, there have been 32 school-associated violent deaths with 24 being homicides and 8 being suicides. The total number of homicides within this year accounts for less than 1% of the total number of homicide victims among children ages 5 – 19. The total number of suicides within the boundaries of school is also below 1% when compared against the total out-of-school number of suicides among youths.

Acts of school violence are not distributed equally in the community; in fact, school violence occurs mostly in urban schools. It has been determined, that rates of violence in schools tend to mirror those within a community; consequently, school violence is likely to occur in inner cities rather than rural areas. Among the schools that tend to have severe discipline issues, as much as 28% report a minimum of at least one crime; in contrast, only 3% of schools with minor discipline issues report the presence of crimes.

Common features

Children that initiate school violence share the following common features: antisocial personality disorders, uncontrollable temper, either low self-esteem or narcissism, fascination with fire, violence and deaths, self-harming behaviors, paranoid ideation, oftentimes caused by exposure to violent behavior in the family, in films and video; they are neglected, abused, rejected by the community. It should be noted, that children are a product of the community they live in; therefore, external factors, such as family, school, and friends are what influence their behaviors directly. Bullying, teasing, and intolerance are the most critical factors that contribute to school violence when it comes to peer-to-peer relations.

Recent studies give particular attention to child exposure to violence as the determining factor that makes students commit violent acts. These studies are based on assumption that violent behavior is learned. Parental conflicts, neglect, and inconsistent supervision combined with no reinforcement of pro-social behaviors oftentimes lead to child aggression. As much as 75% of mothers who experienced domestic violence report that their children witnessed it. There is also a positive correlation between child exposure to violence through video games and movies and child aggression.

Level of crime

The rate of crime in schools also depends on how well a given school can manage crime, policies that the school has, reporting systems, and training. Normally, the safety of schools is assessed based on the following criteria: crisis preparedness, security staffing and procedures, access, inventory and key control, intrusion detection, physical design, security education and training, personal and internal security, community collaboration, and reporting systems. Even though these systems do not affect the rates of crime in high schools, they do decrease the severity of traumas ensuring prompt reaction in emergencies.

Conclusion

Even though the level of crime is not increasing in the United States, several actions that combat factors that influence it should still be undertaken. These actions include integration of safety systems in schools, child reporting systems, conflict resolution and peer mediation programs, emergency systems. Crime in High Schools mirrors what is going on in the community; violence combating should start from the analysis of the external environment children live in and taking corrective actions, when appropriate.

References

Chapell, Mark S., et al. “Bullying in Elementary School, High School and College.” Adolescence 41.164 (2006): 633.

Condon, Christopher D. “Falling Crime Rates, Rising Caseload Numbers: Using Police-Probation Partnerships.” Corrections Today. 2003: 44.

Furlong, Michael, and Gale Morrison. “The School in School Violence: Definitions and Facts.” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders 8.2 (2000): 71.

Lafree, Gary. “DECLINING VIOLENT CRIME RATES IN THE 1990S: Predicting Crime Booms and Busts.” Annual Review of Sociology (1999): 145.

Stephens, Gene. “Global Trends in Crime: Crime Varies Greatly around the World, Statistics Show, but New Tactics Have Proved Effective in the United States. to Keep Crime in Check in the Twenty-First Century, We’ll All Need to Get Smarter, Not Just Tougher.” The Futurist 2003: 40.

Introduction

The Wire was a crime-drama television series that aired from 2002 to 2008. It mainly explored the community struggles of impoverished urban youth in America (through illegal drug trade). The producers of the series based it in Baltimore City, Maryland. Its narrative highlighted how the city’s police department struggled to contain the drug menace in the state. Although HBO aired more than four seasons of the series, this paper reflects on its third season, which follows the theme of the first season (illegal drug trade) in Baltimore (season two focused on drug shipment at the port). Although this paper mainly reflects on community struggles and conflict in the wire, it also focuses on showing how institutional failures create a cycle of impoverishment among America’s urban poor. The last section of this paper shows the lessons learned from the series.

Institutional Failures

The Wire shows how institutional failures and education system inadequacies have contributed to the growing social and economic challenges that affect the urban youth in America. For example, many people are aware of the high unemployment rate in the African-American community. Relative to this observation, Chaddha (9) says many young African-American men suffered from high unemployment rates before the 2007/2008 economic crisis (HBO aired the last season of The Wire before the crisis started). The Wire shows the unemployment reality by highlighting the link between institutional failures and community impoverishment. Supported by years of failing schools and government neglect, many African-American men have faced several social and economic challenges that have forced them to take part in the drug trade. For example, Chaddha (9) says, only 54% of African-American men had a job before the 2007/2008 financial crisis. Comparatively, about 75% of white males had a job during this time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics paints a grimmer picture of these struggles because it shows that after the recession, the level of unemployment soared in the African-American community (Chaddha 9).

Institutional failures outline the main theme of the series, which builds a narrative that indirectly shows how they contribute to the problems facing many young people in urban America. Overall, the wire shows how institutional failures have contributed to the disappearance of jobs and the impoverishment of urban communities. It also highlights how a “shady” world of politics supports incompetence in police investigations and inhibits police ineffectiveness through bureaucracy and excessive institutional control. The creators of the series also do not spare secondary institutional voices (or the lack of it) through media negligence (failing to highlight the important issues facing the community). Comprehensively, they show how institutional failures contribute to the problems facing the urban poor in America.

Community Struggles

Although indirectly tied to social and economic challenges of the urban poor, the wire shows how young and hopeless Baltimore men created powerful organizations from the illegal drug trade. Despite the unrelenting quest by the police department to stop the criminal activities of these organizations, the criminals change their business model by venturing into legitimate businesses (running from the law). Partly, the audience could understand what drives many of the young men into the illegal drug trade because institutional failures “conspire” to limit opportunities for the young men to thrive (institutional failures fuel community struggles and conflict in the Baltimore society). This relationship highlights the structure of inequality in America and the role of the “system” in contributing to the social and economic challenges of the urban poor. Relative to this observation, Chaddha (10) says, “Widespread incarceration of the urban poor aggravates economic inequality, masking the hardship in urban communities and producing a growing population of ex-convicts unable to find stable jobs to support their families.”

The challenges witnessed by the officers in managing the drug problem and the little success they make in prosecuting the drug lords instill a sense of hopelessness among the audience, who now begin to understand that the war on drugs may never be won. Although this is an unfortunate realization, it is interesting to watch how the police casually interact with street-level peddlers, and how they come to know one another in an endless string of arrests and releases. In fact, after watching several episodes of the third season, the arrests made at the street level become a “routine procedure” and do not seem to have an impact on either the police or the arrested drug peddlers.

Despite the merits of the arguments highlighted in this paper, it is important to explore the often thought about, but rarely spoken about, racial stereotypes that could affect how viewers understand the community struggles depicted in the wire. For example, Chaddha (14) says the series reinforces racial stereotypes about African-American communities and their perceived widespread involvement in criminal activities and drug use. Stated differently, at “face value,” the wire almost reinforces the belief that African-Americans are “lazy,” depend on welfare, and “lost” in a criminal world. However, after deeply assessing the series, the audience could understand how the show departs from this mentality to create a deeper understanding of the social and economic problems facing the community. Mainly, it shows that, unlike the popular belief that African-Americans are “authors” of their own struggles, forces that are beyond their control limit their prosperity.

Lessons Learned

After seeing the wire for the first time, one would easily assume that it is another television program showing urban life in the African-American community. However, after closely looking at the series, clearly, the program is more than that. Mainly, it shows how communities struggle to make a living and how law enforcers have trouble maintaining law and order in a culture characterized by high unemployment rates, murders, and “street mentality.” The series shows the difficulty in managing the drug problem from one perspective. In fact, it shows that using a “one-size-fits-all” approach would not work, as a long-term solution to the Baltimore drug problem. Instead, it shows the merits of using multifaceted, and sometimes unconventional approaches to managing the illegal drug trade. The multifaceted approach highlights several instances where the police manage conflict well. For example, in season three, a newly appointed police chief (Howard Colvin) instructs his officers to allow young drug peddlers to sell drugs in designated areas of the city (Hamsterdam) (Vint 80). He also says the police would arrest anyone selling drugs outside the designated zones. This approach is an unconventional method of managing the Baltimore drug problem and caused many controversies in the police department because some senior officers saw the intervention as illegal, while others saw it as an effective way of controlling the street gangs. Contrary to the expectations of the critics, the strategy reduces crime, but when senior officers learn about it, they force Colvin to abandon this strategy and resign from the department. Although the police abandoned the intervention, it highlights one instance where the police managed the conflict well.

Overall, the series shows the difficulties that law enforcers encounter in managing the illegal drug trade. For example, the officers make little progress in managing the drug problem by making street-level arrests. Therefore, they realize that they cannot make significant progress if they do not arrest the drug kingpins. Similarly, the audience understands that although the police may have limited successes in solving some aspects of the drug war, the trade still goes on. For example, if they arrest one drug lord, another one comes up. For example, towards the end of season three, with the help of some insiders, the police “destroy” Barksdale’s criminal empire by arresting its main players. Similarly, other gang members kill their leader (Stringer Bell). The end of this criminal empire seems like a significant success for the police because, since the start of the series, the police had always tried to infiltrate Barksdale’s criminal empire, to no avail. However, as the Barksdale Empire collapses, another one comes up (the Marlo gang) (Marlo 61). They continue the same criminal activities that their predecessors engaged in. Overall, the audience comes to understand that the drug war is a “zero-sum game” because different gangs fill the void left by previous criminals.

The endless strings of arrests, which aim to stop criminal activities in Baltimore city, highlight only one challenge faced by the police. The changing nature of criminal activities also highlights a different challenge that the police face. This challenge manifests in season three when Stringer Bell uses the money he got from the drug trade to do legitimate business. This way, he aims to “cover his tracks” by delinking himself from the illegal drug trade. However, his criminal past haunts him and later leads to his death before he could actualize his ambitions to transform the Barksdale Empire into a legitimate business group. Nonetheless, his quest to transform the business created a significant challenge for the police to link him to the drug business. Moreover, when the police tried to follow the drug money, they uncover a deep political connection between drug traffickers and politicians. This connection poses a unique challenge to the police department because they are unable to arrest the drug kingpins without associating the names of powerful politicians in the process. This challenge is not unique to the drug problem because it highlights the challenges that law enforcers face when they try to trace illegal money (laundered through legitimate businesses). For an aspiring criminal law practitioner, the wire shows the complexity of investigating criminal activities and prosecuting criminal gangs. Indeed, although the activities of such criminal gangs may seem simple, they are not. Therefore, adopting simple solutions to complex criminal activities is wrong. Overall, the series helps me to change my focus regarding how to approach criminal problems.

Conclusion

The Wire helps us to understand the complexity of crime and the need to approach it from a multifaceted perspective. Particularly, it is important to do so because the show helps us to understand crime through the perspective of community struggles, social inequality, and institutional failures. More so, the series helps us to understand how the drug war fuels these institutional failures and offers short-term remedies to community struggles. Although it is difficult to comprehend the connection among these facets of the society, creatively, the wire shows how social, political, and economic forces shape the lives of the urban poor in America. Indeed, although the series is mainly fictional, it does a better job in portraying real social problems among America’s urban poor than any other production series of its time.

Works Cited

Chaddha, Anmol. Why we’re Teaching ‘The Wire’ at Harvard. 2010. Web.

Vint, Sherryl. The Wire: Contemporary Approaches To Film and Television Series: TV Milestones TV Milestones, Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 2013. Print.

The Unites States of America is a multiethnic country where people of different races, cultural background, religion, gender identity, ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, gender, and disability live within similar social, political, and economical sittings; with the such a community setting, incidences of hate crimes occasionally occur.

Hate crime laws commonly known as bias-motivated crimes laws are enacted in the country’s constitution with the mandate of protecting victims and punishing offenders; the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)/FBI and campus security authorities have the mandate of collecting and publishing crime statistics within the country’s boundaries (Jacobs & Kimberly, 1998).

Modern era of hate-crime legislations in the United States were enacted from 1968 with federal statute, 18 U.S. 245, coming into force as one of the Civil Rights Acts.

This paper looks into elements of crime in the United States, it will evaluate targets and/or victims of hate crimes, main causes of hate crime as well as characteristics of hate crime offenders. Individuals who commit hate crimes may not be differentiated from the rest of the people however when watched closely, they have some characteristics that are similar.

Hate crime offenders are people who think or have created the perception that they have been oppressed by the system or the prevailing conditions in their country; they feel that they are suffering because of other people thus when they are coming the hate crimes, they see it as actually reacting to the situation in the effort of making them free (Guinott & Vescio, 2006).

Who are some targets and/or victims of hate crimes?

Hate crime victims cannot be fully said to be against a certain groups or ethnicity in the United States but they occur to different people regardless of their race, ethnicity, tribe or nationality.

When someone is a victim of hate crime, he or has something different than the one committing the crime; incidences that have been proved to be actions of hate crimes proves that the united states has some ethnical and tribal conflicts that when a certain ethnic community, as an individual or community, gets fed up with oppression from the other party, then the resultant is hate crime.

According to hate crime statistics of 2009 by the FBI, crimes in the United States amounted to 6604 where among the offended some characteristics were determined or known by the security body; the known number of offenders were approximately 6225. the statistics went further to classify the identified offenders as 62.4% as offenders with a white orientation, 10.2 % were regarded as people whose race, tribe or nationality could not ascertained, 18.5% were blacks, 7.3% were multiracial people and races and 0.7 were Americans with an Asian/Alaskan Native (Samaha, 2010).

What are some of the causes and effects of these crimes?

The state of the United States American hate crime can be said to have resulted from different causes; the main cause that has remained predominant in the crime scene is the role played by differences in ethnical groups, tribes and nationality of the Americans. There seems to be an unresolved friction among the different races in the United States, for example the blacks feel that they are not getting descent job because of their color and the whites are favored by the same. On the other hand the white feel that the black has come to flood the labor market making their chances of getting jobs low and when they get the jobs they are paid low salaries as supply for labor is high than the demand.

The above two forms of reasoning shows how tension grows among the people and the resultants is likely to be hate crimes among them.

Another factor that brings forth hate crime issues is economic, political, and social environments that the Americans have been exposed to; in current hard economic times, it is continually becoming a challenge for the Americans to meet their financial obligations when they fall due.

The hard economic situation makes them easy to anger and chances that they will cause hate crimes are high; when someone is oppressed by the prevailing condition, he is likely to blame his or her shortcomings to people of the other race, ethnicity, or nationality.

Among different individuals, personal attributes personalities and predispositions as well as psychological stability might make them cause hate crimes intentionally or out of anger, stress or depression. Such occurrences happen without there being forethought but come as a reaction to certain oppression or perceived stress.

During elections, there are high chances that people are divided in the lines of their race, nationality, and ethnic background. When such cases occur, there are always high chances that hate crime will result.

Hate crimes has negative effects on both the victims and the offender; the victim feels he or she has been discriminated and thus builds the grudge in his heart; when grudge builds, races and ethnics backgrounds are likely to form groupings to appeal against oppression from others; this is one of the main cause of ethnic conflicts. When an offender has been prosecuted for committing a hate crime, the consequences in the form of penalties, and imprisonments have die consequences to the accused (Henry & Pratto, 2010).

What actions can be taken to minimize the occurrence of hate crimes?

One of the challenge that the United States government faces id to enact policies and strategies to minimize and probably fully control the situation of hate crime within their boundaries. To effectively do this, the country has come up with projects legal, social, and political to solve the building tension in the economy.

One of the most advocated actions that peace advocators and some politicians have is to persuade people to live in peaces as well as respect themselves. There is much advocacy for people to respect humanity and keep their differences aside in the efforts of economic and social development of the country.

The main challenge that the approach seems to have brought is enlightenment of some people that they actually are different from others and that is why they are advised to treat others well. With such a created notion, when ethnical tensions or chances of hate crime emerge, they are quick to reconnect with their people and fight other groupings (Altschiller, 2005).

The United States legal fraternity has a role to play in prevention and minimization of hate crimes in the community. Legislations that deal with the best way to handle cases of hate crime should strengthen and enlarged to cover all crimes likely to be classified under hate crimes. When someone has been accused and prove guilty of committing a hate crime, punishment should be heavy enough that it will deter the reoccurrence of such crime and warn communities.

References

Altschiller, D. (2005). Hate crimes: a reference handbook. Contemporary world issue. New York: ABC-CLIO.

Guinote, A. & Vescio, K. (2006). The Social Psychology of Power. New Jersey: Guilford Press.

Henry, J. & Pratto, F. (2010). Power and Racism. New York: Wiley.

Jacobs, J. & Kimberly, P. (1998). Hate Crimes: Criminal Law and Identity Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Samaha, J. (2010). Criminal justice .New York: Cengage Learning.

White-collar crime as described by Edward Sutherland from the interactionist school of thought is crimes committed by people of high social status and class. It includes crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, bankruptcy fraud, insider dealing, public corruption, identity theft, pension fund crime, occupational crime, and the likes of all those activities that are done by people of high standards and education. These crimes are usually done through computers or by means of paper. They account for around $300b in losses as stated by the FBI. It is also a fact that these crimes largely go undetected and are therefore a huge threat to the sustenance of economic growth in any country.

White-collar crimes are essentially based individually. They are hard to catch but when they are it is often seen that their punishment is far less than what petty criminals get for stealing a mere television set. Often their payoffs are greater than the hard time they have to face with the law enforcement agencies. Furthermore, the exact extent of their victims is hard to diffuse. Essentially white-collar criminals are motivated to carry out various acts of fraud because of greed or their current economical positions.

There is hardly any difference between them and petty street criminals as both are after the same thing sustenance, the only difference perhaps lies in the fact that white-collar criminals are more sophisticated in their means of carrying out crimes and are not easily caught whilst the petty street criminal has to face the consequences. (Keel, 2008)

Professional crime is different from corporate crime in the sense that it is carried out for the benefit of the individual alone and not for the corporation as a whole and almost always the victim is the client alone. So there is a direct link with the client. However, when it comes to corporate crime the victim cannot be easily identified as the victims are society as a whole, the employees, the shareholders, the customers, etc (Keel, 2008)

Corporate crimes are those that are committed by business entities or by individuals who can be identified with the business corporation. They are responsible for huge losses and their victims are infallibly the public at large. When it comes to the impact of these crimes clearly the winner is atrocities committed by big corporations. Such is the case of the pharmaceuticals company and the incident of the poison cyanide that killed several people and impaired several more. Incidentally, people are more hateful towards corporate crimes as opposed to professional crimes. They would rather see severe consequences for big business entities than individuals and rightly so as the losses and damage were done by big companies Enron which is a case in point have long-lasting effects and unnerving results. (Erman, 2005)

Unlike white-collar crime, a corporate crime includes a wide range of misbehavior at the corporate level most of which is serious in nature. It includes giving false statements of assets thus deceiving and manipulating potential investors, occupational safety health hazards, exploitation of labor, misleading advertisements, formation of illegal monopolies, environmental as well as moral degradation, corrupting people, and bribing them all for the purpose of corporate benefits.

Thus we can understand from this that corporate crime has bigger fish to catch and it does not focus solely on individual benefits such as in the case of white-collar crimes but focuses on the attainment of profits that can prove fruitful for the entire company.

Corporate offenses are hard to study as one must have knowledge of not only criminal law but civil and administrative laws as well. Furthermore, a lot more funds are required to study this area of concern as opposed to white-collar crime. Even though corporate crimes have a far-fetched effect on society as compared to conventional professional crimes they are usually not given much media coverage. In fact, the last time such mega coverage was given to acts of corruption by corporations was when the Enron case became highly publicized in the early 2000s. (Clinard and Yeager, 2005)

The most striking difference between the two lies in the resultant impacts. As mentioned before professional crimes have impacts at an individual level but the damage done by corporations is massive. They sell faulty products to millions of their consumers, they collude with one another and keep prices outrageously high thus stealing from consumers, they give false information on their asset holdings and this leads to the defrauding of thousands of investors and pensioners. Similarly, unsafe working conditions put the lives of millions of workers in danger, and have workplace hazards have resulted in the death of millions of workers. (Clinard and Yeager, 2005)

More importantly when it comes to calculating the cost of corporate crimes and those committed by professionals corporate crime far exceeds the amount as compared to the latter. In fact, the cost of corporate crime far exceeds the cost of all kinds of crimes put together such as burglaries, thefts, arsons, and robberies. When corporate crimes do come in court they almost always get away because they have enough resources to fight any case against them whereas a mere white-collar professional is hard to let off the hook.

Furthermore, corporations or corporate officials cannot be stigmatized as criminals and they hardly come in that domain anyway. At a professional level, the story is a little different. Since they are the sole perpetrators of a specific crime they have to bear the stigmatized label of criminal and undertake a heavier penalty. (Clinard and Yeager, 2005)

Corporate crime is more efficient when it comes to undertaking bribery and corruption is more rampant in this case as compared to white-collar crimes. It takes into account window-dressing which although may not be a crime but can still be misleading as it does not take into account the principle of prudence. Furthermore, misinterpretations and deliberate miscalculations in the accountancy department also lead to fraud. (Clinard and Yeager, 2005)

Lastly, the level of power and influence between a corporation and an individual professional is massive. This great difference explains why crimes conducted on behalf of or by corporations are not easily penalized as opposed to those that are carried out by white-collar professionals.

References

David Erman, 2005, responses to corporate versus individual wrongdoing. Web.

Marshall B Clinard, Peter C. Yeager. Corporate Crime, 2005. Web.

Robert O Keel, White Collar Crime, 2008. Web.

White Collar Crime. Web.

The Crime

In 2013, an eighteen-year-old teenager, who was found guilty of raping a sixteen-year-old girl denied the crime. The girl woke up to find the boy raping her. The girl asserted that she was asleep and, therefore, did not consent to any act. The girl had adequate evidence that the boy had raped her. However, the boy emphasized that he had done nothing. The fact that the sexual crime was committed while the boy was sleepwalking, may suggest that the act has an association with sexsomnia (Eck and Weisburd, 1995).

Causes for the Crime

By raping the girl and claiming later that he had sexsomnia and was sleepwalking, this might be some form of self-actualisation. Through the rape, the boy might have been in a process of self- fulfilment. This means that the boy is a potential rapist and is, therefore, being actualised into what his potential being is. It is worth pointing out that the desire for creative fulfilment is usually greater than major basic needs. To prove his innocence and maintain his integrity and self-esteem, the boy blames sleep and sexomnia.

According to Abraham Maslow (Winfree & Abadinsky, 1996), several needs should be met for an individual to be satisfied (Winfree & Abadinsky, 1996). People have motivations within them, which make them aggressive in meeting their needs (Cressey and Ward, 1969). The hierarchy of needs is presented in a pyramid. On fulfilling some needs, people graduate to other needs, such as security and safety. The desire to have sex is one of the needs discussed by Maslow. Every individual needs to feel loved, intimate with other people, and maintain friendships with peers (Barlow, 1995). Needs motivate various actions; the boy needed to involve himself sexually with the girl. Consequently, he ended up raping her.

According to Attachment Theory, the majority of sex offenders have insecure attachments during childhood. In this case, the boy might have had an insecure childhood and, therefore, engaged in the act for self-interest (Winfree and Abadinsky, 1996). By engaging in rape, the boy was seeking some attachment and appreciation. Individuals who lack attachment during their childhood may use forceful means to acquire it in adulthood.

The Criminal Justice System

Criminal justice experts should first assess the boy’s level of attachment during his childhood, before passing judgement. There are several theories, which elaborate on why people engage in crime. Some social and environmental factors result in criminal behaviour. According to classical theory, every individual has free will and can engage in rational choice. However, some people are driven by social and psychological forces, even when they know the impacts of their acts. It is worth noting that criminals can make rational decisions. However, they engage in crime where they know there are no effective deterrence and punishment systems.

The criminal justice system should assess why the factors that contributed to the rape crime. There is a need to understand that environmental and genetic factors may result in a crime. Knowing these factors is useful in determining the individual’s rationality, and formulating effective disciplinary measures. In addition, they should offer advice to the guardians on how to help the boy. According to Agnew (2006), the recommended strategies for helping the boy include empathy training, cognitive distortions, autobiography, arousal control, and offence pathway.

Conclusion

Various factors lead to criminal acts. Human beings have various levels of needs. Lack of adequate attachment during childhood may make an individual a criminal. The criminal justice system should assess an individual’s background before passing judgement.

References

Agnew, R 2006, Pressured into crime: An overview of general strain theory, Oxford University Press, USA.

Barlow, HD 1995, Crime and public policy: Putting theory to work, Westview Press, New York.

Cressey, DR & Ward, DA 1969, Delinquency, crime, and social process, Harper & Row, New York.

Eck, JE & Weisburd, D 1995, “Crime places in crime theory”, Crime and place, crime prevention studies, vol. 4, pp. 1-33.

Winfree, LT & Abadinsky, H 1996, Understanding crime: Theory and practice, Nelson-Hall Publishers, New York.

Insidious injuries are of great concern to many medical workers, business administrators, and legal professionals. This paper is aimed at discussing this type of injuries and its major attributes. On the whole, much attention should be paid to risk of monitoring. Moreover, one should focus on safety measures that can shield a person against various threats. Furthermore, it is possible to say the understanding of this question can benefit both individuals and organizations that can encounter such problems. On the whole, such healthcare problems are particularly dangerous because they do not manifest themselves at early stages; moreover, such problems cannot be treated easily at the moment when their symptoms become noticeable. This is the main argument that should be elaborated more closely.

Overall, the term insidious injury can be defined as a trauma or a health problem that develops in a very subtle and gradual way; nevertheless, their impacts can be very significant. In many cases, the effects of such injuries can be catastrophic. Moreover, it is important to remember that the connection between the causes and symptoms of insidious injuries are not immediately recognizable (Calhoun & Hiller, 1988, p. 162). Furthermore, the onset of such health problems cannot be immediately identified (Charney & Fragala, 1998, p. 139). This is one of the main issues that should be considered since it is important for understanding the dangers of these injuries and reducing their risks.

Researchers single out a set of attributes that are typical of insidious injuries. In particular, they affect a segment of the population that can be more exposed to a certain risk (Charney & Fragala, 1998, p. 163). For example, one can speak about people who are exposed to various toxins. Additionally, insidious injuries can be attributed to a variety of causes. For instance, people may develop various forms of cancer due to various occupational hazards such as the use of different chemicals; however, this outcome can also be explained by many other factors as well. These are some of the main details that should be taken into account. Overall, these examples throw light on the complexities of insidious injuries as well as their effects on the health of a person.

This issue is important to business administrators who want to avoid litigation. Moreover, the failure to do it can be viewed as a crime (Benson & Simpson, 2009). This argument is particularly relevant if one speaks about work-related diseases (Calhoun & Hiller, 1988). One should keep in mind that employers can be accused of crimes against workers, provided that they fail to minimize occupational hazards (Benson & Simpson, 2009). Apart from that, manufacturers should know what kind of insidious injuries their products can cause (Daniels & Nicoll, 2011; Sullivan, 2011). Additionally, workers should be aware of the threats to which they can be exposed (Charney & Fragala, 1998). This is some of the issues that should not be overlooked by various professionals such as medical workers as well as managers.

On the whole, this discussion indicates that insidious injuries pose a significant risk to various people. It is critical to remember that these health problems emerge in the course of a time-consuming and gradual process that is not always noticeable. These are some of the main challenges that can be identified. Moreover, it is possible to say these problems are relevant to many stakeholders such as employers, producers, and workers who should avoid various pitfalls. These are the main points that can be made.

Reference List

Benson, M., & Simpson, S. (2009). White Collar Crime: An Opportunity Perspective. New York, NY: Routledge.

Calhoun, C., & Hiller, H. (1988). Coping with Insidious Injuries: The Case of Johns- Manville Corporation and Asbestos Exposure. Social Problems 35(2), 162-181.

Charney, W., & Fragala, G. (1998). The Epidemic of Health Care Worker Injury: An Epidemiology. New York, NY: CRC Press.

Daniels, R., & Nicoll, L. (2011). Contemporary Medical-Surgical Nursing. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.

Sullivan, T. (2011). Injury and the New World of Work. New York, NY: UBC Press.

The generalisation about the people who commit crime indicates flaws in the processes of thinking and possible outcomes. In other words, the logic presented by such generalisation does not add up and, in most cases, results in people being treated in specific manners. Indeed, some people advocate for special treatment of specific groups of people considered having a higher possibility of committing a crime, such as theft or violence. The assumptions are based on previous statistics. Various factors contribute to the generalisation that a given group of people, such as poor ones, could commit more crimes than other groups. For example, the media promote such generalisations. The media contribute to the fallacious generalisations, which result in disproportionate policing of particular groups, especially the poor. Interestingly, people consider such policing generalisations to be ‘acceptable’ and ‘legitimate’. Over-policing of specific groups often results in higher arrest rates among the poor communities, thereby promoting the fallacious conception that the poor commit more crimes (Bex, 2011).

It appears that the society chooses to pay attention to crime committed by specific groups, such as the poor, because it works as a method of absolving the society from the institutionalised discrimination, violence and prejudice used against specific communities or groups of people. Therefore, the generalisation acts as a buffer for people who do not want to take responsibility and gives a way to shift blame in addition to changing the cause effect relationship. The fallacy of generalising people who commit crime stains the social setup and corrupts the society and general mindset. More importantly, people should not focus on particular groups as crime perpetrators. Instead, people should speak about the reality and end the long-standing fallacious generalisations (Martinot, 2003).

Teleological justifications for punishment

The criticism against teleological justifications for punishment, such as deterrence theories, makes no sense because the punishments help to deter others from committing similar crimes. In other words, people are not punished for the crimes they commit. In fact, the objective of the punishment is to prevent future occurrence of them, because of lessons learnt from the punishment. The deterrence applies for individual or specific cases. Individual or specific deterrence work by preventing specific persons from committing the crime in the future. The justice system achieves the deterrence by keeping persons in custody to achieve physical deterrence or by incapacitating individuals, which takes away the ability to commit the crime again. On the contrary, general deterrence does not benefit the perpetrator. The objective is to prevent others in the community from committing the crime and promoting societal reformation. General deterrence makes sense considering that the individual does not benefit, but the community benefits in the end because people learn about the dangers of crimes (Tella & Tella, 2006).

Teleological punishments support capital punishment for perpetrators, which effectively prevent crime in the future and teach persons the dangers and negative implications of it for themselves and the community. For instance, murder or statutory rape cases receive severe punishments, which speaks for the grave nature of the crimes. The punishments imply that no one should commit such crimes in society. In this regard, punishments are used as a means of preventing rather than a way of ending crimes in the society (Sarat, Anderson & Frank, 2010). Although criminologists and sociologists argue against such teleological punishments based on the impulsiveness of committing crime and failing to serve the intended purpose, deterrence helps in reducing crime and teaching the society.

References

Bex, F. J. (2011). Arguments, stories and criminal evidence a formal hybrid theory. New York, NY: Springer.

Martinot, S. (2003). The rule of racialization: class, identity, governance. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Sarat, A., Anderson, M. D., & Frank, C. O. (2010). Law and the humanities: an introduction. Cambridge, United Kingdom.: Cambridge University Press.

Tella, M. J., & Tella, F. (2006). Punishment and culture a right to punish?. Boston, MA: M. Nijhoff.

It is acknowledged that white collar crime offenders differ from street offenders in a number of ways. There was a prevailing idea that a white collar offender is a white “respectable” male with high social status (Benson & Simpson, 2009, p. 19). As for psychological characteristics, it was believed that white collar offenders were “ego-driven” and “cunning” criminals (Personality, environment, 2006). However, a growing body of research has demonstrated that this is a biased representation of such kind of criminal. Researchers have identified major demographic and psychological traits of white collar offenders.

As far as demographic characteristics are concerned, it is possible to note that white collar offenders are predominantly white males in their forties (Feeley, 2014). In the vast majority of cases, these offenders have college or high school education and are unlikely to be unemployed (Ragatz, Fremouw and Baker, 2012). It is noteworthy that white collar offenders are less likely to abuse substances (Babiak, Neumann, & Hare, 2010). It is possible to conclude that white collar offenders are usually well off and have certain status (the status can be quite high) in the society. Though, these people are not necessarily rich or occupy significant position in the society. It is also necessary to add that white collar crimes are often committed by women (one third of cases) but these crimes are not very serious (Feeley, 2009). This can be a result of the existing glass ceiling and lack of opportunities for females. This can also involve certain psychological characteristics as white collar crime offenders often have traits attributed to males.

For instance, it has been found that white collar offenders are often characterised by traits which are common among high-profile successful managers. Benson and Manchak (2014) note that it was believed that culture was the major factor that accounts for white collar crimes. Nonetheless, at present, researchers state that individual’s psychological characteristics are the key factors in the process. Thus, Ragatz et al. (2012) provide the following description of a white collar criminal. This person is confident and creative, competitive and demonstrates social extraversion (Ragatz et al., 2012). Notably, these qualities often make a good top manager. However, white collar offenders are not team workers and are characterised by quite high level of narcissism and conscientiousness. Ragatz et al. (2012, p. 982) add that such criminals show low level of “behavioural self-control”. Thus, it turns out that the white collar offender is a creative (which involves attention to details) and confident employee who is capable of breaking social rules.

On balance, it is necessary to note that demographic and psychological characteristics of white collar offenders are seen differently now. At present, when talking about this kind of criminal, people do not see a hypothetical wealthy white cunning male. The white collar offender is now seen as a male employee in his 40-s who has all major characteristics to be a high-profile professional but chooses to break the rules. Notably, females are also involved in such crimes but these cases are not very common. It is important to note that research has enabled people to see new facets of the complex issue and it will be possible to identify characteristics which predict certain behaviour in employees. Clearly, further research is necessary in this field.

Reference List

Babiak, P., Neumann, G.S., & Hare, R.D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: talking the walk. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 28(1), 174-193.

Benson, M., & Manchak, S. M. (2014). The psychology of white-collar offending. In Oxford handbooks online in criminology and criminal justice.

Benson, M., & Simpson, S.S. (2009). White collar crime: An opportunity perspective. Oxon: Routledge.

Feeley. (2014). Module II: Topic 1. Retrieved from www.articulate.com

Personality, environment, and the causes of white-collar crime. (2006). Law & Psychology Review, 30, 201-208.

Ragatz, L.L., Fremouw, W., Baker, E. (2012). The psychological profile of white-collar offenders: Demographics, criminal thinking, psychopathic traits, and psychopathology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(7), 978-997.