It is true that ex-prisoners can become productive members of society. While there is a compelling argument that former inmates are indeed the best mentors for the youth in crime prevention, I still believe that having reformed offenders influence the young minds can bring in some potential drawbacks.
On the one hand, individuals who have experienced prison life can possess an authentic perspective that can resonate deeply with teenagers. The main reason is that their personal stories often embody the real consequences of criminal behavior, making their narratives more impactful than theoretical discussions or warnings delivered by those who have not endured similar experiences. For instance, a former inmate who talks about missing significant life events, like the birth of his/her child, while serving time can effectively highlight the cost of criminal decisions, allowing the teenagers to see the tangible results of crime beyond the mere statistics.
On the other hand, in my opinion, allowing ex-prisoners to talk about the dangers of crime commitment could also have some negative impacts on the youth. Firstly, this could accidentally lead to glamorization of crime rather than deterrence. To be more specific, teenagers, who are often impressionable, might focus more on the perceived excitement or rebellion of the ex-prisoner's criminal past rather than the negative consequences discussed. Secondly, former criminals typically lack professional training in counseling or education, which can limit their effectiveness in communicating with teenagers. In a school setting, for example, a session led by an ex-inmate might fail to provide the structured guidance that helps teenages critically analyze their decisions. This could result in discussions that do not yield meaningful reflections among the youth.
In conclusion, although having the ex-prisoners talk about the criminal dangers is thought to be the best way to discourage the youth from committing crime, I still believe that this action can bring in some negative influences. This is because discussing the criminal activities could unintentionally glamorize crime rather than prevent it, and the former inmates do not have enough training to communicate with the youth effectively.
On the one hand, individuals who have experienced prison life can possess an authentic perspective that can resonate deeply with teenagers. The main reason is that their personal stories often embody the real consequences of criminal behavior, making their narratives more impactful than theoretical discussions or warnings delivered by those who have not endured similar experiences. For instance, a former inmate who talks about missing significant life events, like the birth of his/her child, while serving time can effectively highlight the cost of criminal decisions, allowing the teenagers to see the tangible results of crime beyond the mere statistics.
On the other hand, in my opinion, allowing ex-prisoners to talk about the dangers of crime commitment could also have some negative impacts on the youth. Firstly, this could accidentally lead to glamorization of crime rather than deterrence. To be more specific, teenagers, who are often impressionable, might focus more on the perceived excitement or rebellion of the ex-prisoner's criminal past rather than the negative consequences discussed. Secondly, former criminals typically lack professional training in counseling or education, which can limit their effectiveness in communicating with teenagers. In a school setting, for example, a session led by an ex-inmate might fail to provide the structured guidance that helps teenages critically analyze their decisions. This could result in discussions that do not yield meaningful reflections among the youth.
In conclusion, although having the ex-prisoners talk about the criminal dangers is thought to be the best way to discourage the youth from committing crime, I still believe that this action can bring in some negative influences. This is because discussing the criminal activities could unintentionally glamorize crime rather than prevent it, and the former inmates do not have enough training to communicate with the youth effectively.