People are calling into question the current actions to prevent crimes are sufficient and offense is being solved while some people advocate the idea that society requires more decisive decisions to keep the crime away from the community. Both views present rational ideas, which will be elaborated.
On the other hand, supporters of applying more strict laws to overcome crime assert that the benefits of tough laws are by no means negligible. They believe one of the positive effects of more action to control the crime is the fear that spreads on offenders community and it delivers a vivid message to law offenders, irrespective of what kind of crime they had committed, the law convicted them to harsh punishment even if they committed a petty crime. For example, Iran has the toughest law for criminals and according to a national survey the majority of this society is terrified of being faced with the law and that illustrates the result of this action on third world countries.
In contrast, there are some arguments in favor of the crime is being attacked by the best method. A proportion of people reckon that the comprehensive plans of actions that have been determined, prevent people from doing more criminal actions and the crime rate in society is utterly normal also they believe tough laws will be an inducement for committing criminal tasks. For example in Germany despite what crime has been committed by criminals, they are free to run away from jail because they believe freedom is one of our instinct.
In conclusion, some people consider that perpetrators should have been faced with a more and more difficult situation, s and by this method they can deter good people from offenders although a group of people think in other way and consider that current action fulfills the humanity demand.
People
are calling into question the
current
actions to
prevent
crimes
are sufficient and offense is
being solved
while
some
people
advocate the
idea
that society requires more decisive decisions to
keep
the
crime
away from the community. Both views present rational
ideas
, which will
be elaborated
.
On the other hand
, supporters of applying more strict
laws
to overcome
crime
assert that the benefits of tough
laws
are by no means negligible. They believe one of the
positive
effects of more
action
to control the
crime
is the fear that spreads on offenders community and it delivers a vivid message to
law
offenders, irrespective of what kind of
crime
they had committed, the
law
convicted them to harsh punishment even if they committed a petty
crime
.
For example
, Iran has the toughest
law
for
criminals
and according to a national survey the majority of this society
is terrified
of
being faced
with the
law
and that illustrates the result of this
action
on third world countries.
In contrast
, there are
some
arguments in favor of the
crime
is
being attacked
by the best method. A proportion of
people
reckon that the comprehensive plans of actions that have
been determined
,
prevent
people
from doing more
criminal
actions and the
crime
rate in society is
utterly
normal
also
they believe tough
laws
will be an inducement for committing
criminal
tasks.
For example
in Germany despite what
crime
has
been committed
by
criminals
, they are free to run away from jail
because
they believe freedom is one of our instinct.
In conclusion
,
some
people
consider that perpetrators should have
been faced
with a more and more difficult situation, s and by this method they can deter
good
people
from offenders although a group of
people
think
in other way and consider that
current
action
fulfills the humanity demand.