Topic :
Crimes has always been a remarkable problems occurring in almost countries for ages. Therefore many punishments has been invented in order to struggle with it, but it is believed that imprisonment is the best deterrence for criminals. In my opinion, I slightly oppose that because I think not all criminals need going to jail and I'll draw some evidence for my thought.
From what I have learnt, people have been fighting for their freedom for many years. So the primary reason is when cops imprison them mean they are taking liberty from them, to me this is a very heavy punishment to a living human. Hence, this kind of deterrence should only be applied on those who are actually deserve it such as: gangsters, robbers...With those who just commit a petty offence only need to be deterred slightly. For example, a man behave badly in public place like fighting or talking egregiously about a sensitive topic doesn't need going to jails but can be fined or executed a curfew order in his house for a few days.
Secondly, if government applies imprisonment on a villains who have committed a serious case, it won't be fair for the victims and may cause fear in the residences when the villains get out of jail. In particularly, a serial killer be sentenced and move to prison will obviously lead to protests or rebellions, unless those have to pay equitably rather than be locked away.
However, few of them just get in to criminal way because they have to do it for a living. Therefore if there is a chance, we should give to them, being a few years in prison would change them substantially and as a consequence, they become a better person.
In conclusion, prison is a good and efficient deterrence but it's not the only one. Henceforth before sentencing a specific criminal we should consider if it is petty or inferior to give out the appropriate punishment.
Prison is the best punishment for criminals. Discuss.
Crimes has always been a remarkable problems occurring in almost countries for ages. Therefore many punishments has been invented in order to struggle with it, but it is believed that imprisonment is the best deterrence for criminals. In my opinion, I slightly oppose that because I think not all criminals need going to jail and I'll draw some evidence for my thought.
From what I have learnt, people have been fighting for their freedom for many years. So the primary reason is when cops imprison them mean they are taking liberty from them, to me this is a very heavy punishment to a living human. Hence, this kind of deterrence should only be applied on those who are actually deserve it such as: gangsters, robbers...With those who just commit a petty offence only need to be deterred slightly. For example, a man behave badly in public place like fighting or talking egregiously about a sensitive topic doesn't need going to jails but can be fined or executed a curfew order in his house for a few days.
Secondly, if government applies imprisonment on a villains who have committed a serious case, it won't be fair for the victims and may cause fear in the residences when the villains get out of jail. In particularly, a serial killer be sentenced and move to prison will obviously lead to protests or rebellions, unless those have to pay equitably rather than be locked away.
However, few of them just get in to criminal way because they have to do it for a living. Therefore if there is a chance, we should give to them, being a few years in prison would change them substantially and as a consequence, they become a better person.
In conclusion, prison is a good and efficient deterrence but it's not the only one. Henceforth before sentencing a specific criminal we should consider if it is petty or inferior to give out the appropriate punishment.
