There are many punishments to prevent the commission of crimes, such as imprisonment, financial penalties, and capital punishment, etc.
Some people believe that putting criminals in prison is not always the effective way but there are better alternative ways to deal with crime. However, others argue that the best way to reduce offences is to imprison criminals.
On one hand, prisoners could become better persons later by practical ways such as educating offenders, educational and vocational training. For example, many teenagers and children are exploited by some drug dealers to deliver drugs. Those have a lack of knowledge, so if we open the door to teach them and enrich their knowledge that would lead them to know what is legal and what is illegal and help them to avoid making the same mistakes. So, if imprisonment is becoming the way to punish them maybe they will learn more bad things because of being accompanied by different types of murderers and criminals in prison.
On the other hand, according to the view that imprisonment is the most effective way which has been a popular and traditional method to fight crimes for many years because it can prevent many crimes. Thus, that means when people know that the punishment for committing crimes would be a long-time sentence in jail, they would be scared to do crimes, which could cost them to spend all their life behind bars which is in fact a so hard penalty. So, imprisonment is a deterrent to committing crimes.
Furthermore, murderers should be isolated from society. For example, serious criminals like serial killers, cannot be socialised with people, so that can prevent other crimes to happen.
To summarise everything, I partially agree that imprisoning offenders provides several public benefits, but it is not always the best way.
Some of the public benefits that result from offenders being imprisoned include the societal safety of people who live in areas where they are exposed to and familiar with crime.
There are
many
punishments to
prevent
the commission of
crimes
, such as
imprisonment
, financial penalties, and capital punishment, etc.
Some
people
believe that putting criminals in prison is not always the effective
way
but
there are better alternative
ways
to deal with
crime
.
However
, others argue that the best
way
to
reduce
offences
is to imprison criminals.
On one hand, prisoners could become better persons later by practical
ways
such as educating offenders, educational and vocational training.
For example
,
many
teenagers
and children
are exploited
by
some
drug dealers to deliver drugs. Those have a lack of knowledge,
so
if we open the door to teach them and enrich their knowledge that would lead them to know what is legal and what is illegal and
help
them to avoid making the same mistakes.
So
, if
imprisonment
is becoming the
way
to punish them maybe they will learn more
bad
things
because
of
being accompanied
by
different
types of murderers and criminals in prison.
On the other hand
, according to the view that
imprisonment
is the most effective
way
which has been a popular and traditional method to fight
crimes
for
many
years
because
it can
prevent
many
crimes
.
Thus
, that means when
people
know that the punishment for committing
crimes
would be a long-time sentence in jail, they would
be scared
to do
crimes
, which could cost them to spend all their life behind bars which is in fact a
so
hard
penalty.
So
,
imprisonment
is a deterrent to committing crimes.
Furthermore
, murderers should
be isolated
from society.
For example
, serious criminals like serial killers, cannot be
socialised
with
people
,
so
that can
prevent
other
crimes
to happen.
To
summarise
everything, I
partially
agree
that imprisoning offenders provides several public benefits,
but
it is not always the best way.
Some of the
public benefits that result from offenders
being imprisoned
include the societal safety of
people
who
live
in areas where they
are exposed
to and familiar with
crime
.