in black and white
Main menu
Share a book About us Home
Biology Business Chemistry Computers Culture Economics Fiction Games Guide History Management Mathematical Medicine Mental Fitnes Physics Psychology Scince Sport Technics

Fraud Exprosed Whot you Dont Could Cost your company millions - Joseph W.

Joseph W. Fraud Exprosed Whot you Dont Could Cost your company millions - Wiley Publishing, 2003. - 289 p.
ISBN: 0-471-27475-5
Download (direct link): fraudexposedwhatyoudont2003.pdf
Previous << 1 .. 29 30 31 32 33 34 < 35 > 36 37 38 39 40 41 .. 147 >> Next

Gottfredson and Hirschi then go on to discuss the satisfaction and displacement aspects of their construct of criminal causation:
Third, they reject “root cause” determinates of criminal behavior by arguing that most criminal acts serve no purpose other than satisfaction of an immediate need. Accordingly, policies that seek to address theoretical “causes” such as poverty or drug dependency, are likely to meet limited success. Also, they posit that offenders are not pathologically “driven” to crime. Accordingly, preventive measures, such as automobile theft deterrent programs may, in fact, reduce auto theft. They note their theory does not predict that such a program would then increase the occurrence of another type of crime to offset the reduced levels of auto theft.25
Here, without meaning to oversimplify the general theory, it is important to bear in mind two things. First, Gottfredson and Hirshci are trying to literally put forth a general theory of crime, one that will be useful in explaining acts as disparate as murder and shoplifting. Accordingly, they must cover a lot of ground and circumstances. Second, in their theory the driving motivator is low self-control, whose consequences they see as a desire for immediate gratification with little or no regard for long-term consequences. Their position is, in rough terms, an inclination rather than a pathology. Thus they seem to accept that some acts by organizations or agencies may defer some acts of criminality, but there is no quota system in effect. The criminal is not, in their view, driven to commit a certain number of deviant acts each day, and if one need is satisfied will seek another outlet in the form of a different activity or a different location. At the same time, as we shall see next, they believe this inclination persists for a considerable period, tempered only, it appears, by age:
Finally, they note that they too, accept the conventional wisdom that indicates crime rates decrease with age, but caution others to be wary of interpreting such changes to be the result of some criminal justice program or initiative.26
Here, Gottfredson and Hirschi are in concert with many other theorists and researchers in agreeing that the rate of criminal activity seems to almost always decrease with age, with the late teenage years into the early twenties being particularly active. We may recall also that Hollinger and Clark concluded that age was a significant factor in their study of workplace fraud published in 1983. The general theory seems to say that while the decrease is notable in terms of the individual’s past transcript of offenses, those with low levels of self-control will likely always have incident rates higher than their better-controlled peers, regardless of age.
Since the concept of self-control, or the lack of it, drives their theory, it is useful to consider what Gottfredson and Hirschi see as being the consequences of the acts deriving from this deficit. In other words, when due to a lack of sufficient self-control, a person commits a criminal act, what happens? They posit the following conditions:27
1. There is immediate gratification. In their theory, persons with low levels of self-control respond greatly to stimuli in their immediate environment. They have a here and now orientation toward life and tend to seize on whatever (or whomever) they perceive as providing immediate gratification. Those with higher levels of self-control are not immune to the temptations the environment may offer; they simply usually chose to defer gratification.
2. Acts emanating from low levels of self-control tend to be simple and/or easy. There is no degree of planning or reconnaissance. Immediacy, in their theory, drives the person to seek money without work, sex without courtship, or revenge without consequence. The immediate nature of the action, in their view, almost precludes by definition that which is either complex or time-consuming.
3. Again almost by definition, those with low levels of self-control are action people. They are attracted to risk, excitement, and thrill. This is consistent with their here and now orientation and unlike the cautious, thoughtful, and verbal orientation Gottfredson and Hirschi believe characterizes those with high levels of self-control.
4. The theory holds that criminal acts such as these provide little long-term benefit. They are hardly the equivalent of a profession, career, trade, or job. Such impulsive acts actually detract from stability in vocation, marriage, friendships, or employment. In their view, the concept of a career criminal is
accurate in a semantic sense, but dead wrong in a causal sense. The popular usage of career criminal is one who chooses a life of crime as an alternative to gainful employment. There is an implication of a rough equivalency, at least in terms of continuing means of economic sustenance. Gottfredson and Hirschi would probably agree that a career criminal is one who has committed (or at least been arrested for) a large number of crimes. They would, however, argue that in purely economic terms the career criminal could make more money bagging groceries on a consistent basis. In their theory, the low-self-control crime is impulsive and almost always petty, at least in terms of economic benefit.
Previous << 1 .. 29 30 31 32 33 34 < 35 > 36 37 38 39 40 41 .. 147 >> Next