Collective Effort and Collective Liability Essay

corporate Effort and Collective Liability - Essay ExampleThese intentional misuses of personal information are punishable whether they are carried stunned by hand, by dint of the conventional postage system, or through electronic means (18 U.S.C. section 1028 (c). Because the individuality Theft do work of 1998 was deemed an inadequate deterrent, Congress passed the indistinguishability Theft Penalty Enhancement Act in 2004 in station to increase sentences for violators of the 1998 Act (18 U.S.C. 1028A). Despite these new laws, and the enhanced punishments, identity theft continues to chivy individuals (Lahey & Matejkovic, 2001), businesses (Beales, 2002 Collins, 2003), and even mesomorphic and well-resourced governmental organizations (Identity Theft. Internal Revenue Service, nd Kahn & Roberds, 2005). The irony is that the identity theft law-breaking has m any enemies, enactment in place to criminalize all acts associated with identity theft, enhanced punishment legislati on, and merely the crime is change magnitude rather than decreasing clearly, therefore, current responses are inadequate. Even a cursory interrogation of the relevant entropy and statistics is sobering. From a financial point of view, Collins notes that Personal identity theft is a $100-billion perannum industry worldwide however,the cost of stolen business identities can be expected to be even great (2003). The statistics are similarly disturbing in terms of the sheer number of individuals, businesses, and governmental organizations which have been victimized in some.... As a preliminary matter, identity theft is defined by federal statute. The Identity Theft Act defines identity theft as occurring whenever a person knowingly and without lawful office staff produces an identification document or a false identification document (18 U.S.C. section 1028(a)(1), 1998) or otherwise possesses, transfers, uses, or creates an identification document or false identification document while knowing that any of these acts are unlawful. (18 U.S.C. sections1028 (a)(2)-(a)(7), 1998). These intentional misuses of personal information are punishable whether they are carried out by hand, through the conventional postage system, or through electronic means (18 U.S.C. section 1028 (c). Because the Identity Theft Act of 1998 was deemed an inadequate deterrent, Congress passed the Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act in 2004 in order to increase sentences for violators of the 1998 Act (18 U.S.C. 1028A). Despite these new laws, and the enhanced punishments, identity theft continues to plague individuals (Lahey & Matejkovic, 2001), businesses (Beales, 2002 Collins, 2003), and even powerful and well-resourced governmental organizations (Identity Theft. Internal Revenue Service, nd Kahn & Roberds, 2005). The irony is that the identity theft crime has many enemies, legislation in place to criminalize all acts associated with identity theft, enhanced punishment legislation, and yet the crime is increasing rather than decreasing clearly, therefore, current responses are inadequate. Even a cursory examination of the relevant data and statistics is sobering. From a financial point of view, Collins notes that