In this day and age, delinquency has become more and more serious in many parts of the world. It is often argued that higher imprisonment is the most feasible solution to prevent this trend, whereas others advocate different strategies should be utilised. There is a strong case to be made for both sides of the debate.
On the one hand, it is indisputable that prolonging prison time is the most prevalent method to alleviate the crime rate. To be more specific, a long-term prison sentence is more likely to help those who committed crimes to have more time in a bid to be aware of the importance of freedom and relinquish their criminal behaviours. This method is, so the argument goes, attributed to possibly prohibiting those who have an intention to commit offences once. Thanks to this, society can be protected from illegal and hazardous activities, such as assault, murder and terrorism.
On the other hand, numerous people suggest that we ought to consider other short-term measures rather than the longer imprisonment. In fact, the causes of the crime rate increase stem from poverty and unemployment, which have not been fully resolved. Thus, the authority should deploy a few policies in order to nudge local businesses and foreign companies to invest money along with creating more occupations for unemployed people. As a result, when the need for labour is boosted, the proportion of people out of work falls and so does the crime rate. To look at a supporting example, one needs to look no further than delinquency in Japan, which was recorded at about 0, 5 from 2000 to 2009. However, when the government loosened regulations for foreign investors and loaned domestic corporations at low interest rates in 2012, this crime rate was only around 0. 3.
In conclusion, although a longer imprisonment will help to warn offenders and a few individuals who intend to violate, I hold belief that local governments need to focus more on appealing foreign investors instead of implementing the former.
In this day and age, delinquency has become more and more serious in
many
parts of the world. It is
often
argued that higher imprisonment is the most feasible solution to
prevent
this trend, whereas others advocate
different
strategies should be
utilised
. There is a strong case to
be made
for both sides of the debate.
On the one hand, it is indisputable that prolonging prison time is the most prevalent method to alleviate the
crime
rate
. To be more specific, a long-term prison sentence is more likely to
help
those who committed
crimes
to have more time in a bid to be aware of the importance of freedom and relinquish their criminal
behaviours
. This method is,
so
the argument goes, attributed to
possibly
prohibiting those who have an intention to commit
offences
once. Thanks to this, society can
be protected
from illegal and hazardous activities, such as assault, murder and terrorism.
On the other hand
, numerous
people
suggest that we ought to consider other short-term measures
rather
than the longer imprisonment. In fact, the causes of the
crime
rate
increase stem from poverty and unemployment, which have not been
fully
resolved.
Thus
, the authority should deploy a few policies in order to nudge local businesses and foreign
companies
to invest money along with creating more occupations for unemployed
people
.
As a result
, when the need for
labour
is boosted
, the proportion of
people
out of work falls and
so
does the
crime
rate
. To look at a supporting example, one needs to look no
further
than delinquency in Japan, which
was recorded
at about 0, 5 from 2000 to 2009.
However
, when the
government
loosened regulations for foreign investors and loaned domestic corporations at low interest
rates
in 2012, this
crime
rate
was
only
around 0. 3.
In conclusion
, although a longer imprisonment will
help
to warn offenders and a few individuals who intend to violate, I hold belief that local
governments
need to focus more on appealing foreign investors
instead
of implementing the former.