Every government allocates a certain proportion of its budget for the safety of its citizens. Some people opine that authorities should invest money to eradicate the root cause of crime while others assert that it ought to be spent on the punishment of criminals. In my opinion, uprooting the causes of crime is the most effective way to make the society safer.
On the one hand, there are certainly some benefits to spending money on punishing the offenders in order to set an example in front of the public. Strict punishment is a lesson for people and it can create fear among them. As a result, they will not want to indulge in any kind of illegal activity. For instance, some nations have negligible incidences of rape because they follow stringent punishment procedures to tackle such cases. However, I believe that it is a less effective way because when people are about to commit a crime, they are not in a sober mood to think about the consequences.
On the other hand, investing funds to eradicate the major causes of crime is a much more beneficial strategy because this will dramatically decrease the crime rate. The majority of illegal activities are performed by offenders due to the lack of insufficient funds and unemployment. If such problems are eradicated from the society by authorities, the crime figures will automatically drop. Moreover, investment in removing crime will lead to the foundation of an egalitarian society where people will be able to live peacefully and safely. Countries, where the crime rate is zero are the happiest and Finland is a prime example of this. This is much more effective than punishing people to set an example for others because people easily forget what happened to others.
In conclusion, although spending money on harsh punishment is a lesson for criminals and public, I think working on the main reason of crime is a much more effective strategy to eliminate crime completely as it will be better for the safety of people and for the progress of the country / the nation.
Every
government
allocates a certain proportion of its budget for the safety of its citizens.
Some
people
opine that authorities should invest money to eradicate the root cause of
crime
while others assert that it ought to
be spent
on the
punishment
of criminals. In my opinion, uprooting the causes of
crime
is the most
effective
way to
make
the society safer.
On the one hand, there are
certainly
some
benefits to spending money on punishing the offenders in order to set an example in front of the public. Strict
punishment
is a lesson for
people
and it can create fear among them.
As a result
, they will not want to indulge in any kind of illegal activity.
For instance
,
some
nations have negligible incidences of rape
because
they follow stringent
punishment
procedures to tackle such cases.
However
, I believe that it is a less
effective
way
because
when
people
are about to commit a
crime
, they are not in a sober mood to
think
about the consequences.
On the other hand
, investing funds to eradicate the major causes of
crime
is a much more beneficial strategy
because
this will
dramatically
decrease the
crime
rate. The majority of illegal activities
are performed
by offenders due to the lack of insufficient funds and unemployment. If such problems
are eradicated
from the society by authorities, the
crime
figures will
automatically
drop.
Moreover
, investment in removing
crime
will lead to the foundation of an egalitarian society where
people
will be able to
live
peacefully
and
safely
. Countries, where the
crime
rate is zero are the happiest and Finland is a prime example of this. This is much more
effective
than punishing
people
to set an example for others
because
people
easily
forget what happened to others.
In conclusion
, although spending money on harsh
punishment
is a lesson for criminals and public, I
think
working on the main reason of
crime
is a much more
effective
strategy to eliminate
crime
completely as it will be better for the safety of
people
and for the progress of the country / the nation.