Prison is the common way most countries try to solve the problem of crime. However, a more effective solution is to provide the public with a better education. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Reducing the crime rate will be achieved more effectively through better education rather than prison sentences. I am afraid I have to disagree with this view because I consider that both approaches have distinctive merits and should each play an integral role in tackling crime.
On the one hand, I would argue that prison effectively deals with offenders. One reason is that a person who commits a crime must learn that unlawful actions have consequences. Murderers, for instance, must be imprisoned for many years, and such a punishment may act as a deterrent. They know they will face loss of freedom, social isolation and separation from their loved ones if they commit such a criminal act. Another reason is that when serious offenders are behind bars, they are no longer a danger to society, and people can walk in the streets or relax in their homes more safely.
On the other hand, education has a complementary role to play. Firstly, in schools, students should study some aspects of the law which affect their lives. Having some knowledge of the law, students are better prepared to avoid situations involving them in a crime or becoming a victim. For example, youngsters must study the essential laws about driving and road safety. Secondly, in prisons themselves, educational programmes must aim to provide prisoners with skills and qualifications to find work when they are released.
I believe that prison sentences are one essential weapon in the fight against crime, and I disagree that providing better education alone is a more effective solution to reduce the crime rate.
Follow Us on IELTSDATA Twitter