Q2: Why is corporate crime/white collar crime perceived as less serious than "street crime"? Should it be? If so, why? If not, why not?.
A white-collar crime refers to crimes committed by business people, entrepreneurs, professionals, or public officials. It was a term first coined by Edwin Sutherland who defined the term as "crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation" (Sutherland 1974) and was the first to bring attention to the matter. White-collar crimes are different then street crimes because they are through deception and not force or violence. There has been much debate as to what qualifies as a white-collar crime, the term today generally describes a variety of non-violent crimes usually committed in commercial situations for financial gain. Many white-collar crimes are especially difficult to prosecute because the perpetrators are sophisticated criminals who have attempted to conceal their activities through a series of complex transactions. (Bologna 1984) My essay will attempt to address why white collar crime is perceived as less serious than street crime and why it should not be. To answer the question entirely, we have to look at the definition white collar crime. However, this is not easy as the definition of white collar crime has been disputed and there has not yet been a total agreement on a proper definition of the term.
Let us look at why the problem of definition has arisen. Firstly, the term "White Collar Crime" lacks in clarity about the crimes that were documented by Edwin Sutherland. The argument was that the corporate activities that were documented in his book were merely civil matters and not crimes. Critics felt that Sutherland was trying to stretch the term "crime" too far. Secondly, it was felt that Sutherland had inaccurately or rather had not been able to term correctly which crimes committed qualified as white collar.
