Opinions are divided on whether rehabilitation should be the primary goal of punishment or whether imprisonment is the better option for the sake of social stability. I believe that the answer may vary, depending on the severity committed.
On the one hand, criminals found guilty of major wrongdoings that devastatingly leave individuals with great suffering should be confined in prisons for the long term. Murder,
, usually causes unbearable grief for the victim’s loved ones.
reason, these repercussions brought about by serious crimes can be prevented with prison captivity because it acts as a deterrent AGAINST others, MAKING THEM think twice before taking part in illegal acts.
, imprisonment is of great importance as it is one of the most efficient means of keeping criminals, especially serial ones, from obedient individuals,
ensuring their safety in society.
On the other hand
, rehabilitation programmes play an essential role since it provides another chance for individuals to engage in criminal activities out of irresistible impulse or anger. Domestic violence,
, usually occurs as two partners have PERSISTENTLY UNRESOLVED quarrels or misunderstandings.
, re-education classes and psychology approaches can be offered to have these offenders grasp their wrongs and re-enter their society as reformed people.
lenient punishment can
alleviate pressure on the government budget that pays for incarcerated people and prison facilities in many countries.
In conclusion, there is no one-size-fits-all answer on whether crime punishment should put its emphasis on incarceration or rehabilitation.
the former can be suitable for major crimes, the latter aims at providing a
chance for those who commit crimes out of temptation and reducing governments’ spending on prison facilities.