Some believe that all individuals who break the law should be placed in prison as a form of punishment. However, others hold the view that there are more effective alternatives to deal with lawbreakers. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Some people claim that every lawbreaker should be imprisoned,

while

others

believe that there are better ways to handle criminals. In

this

essay, I will interpret both perspectives and contend in favour of the latter. On the one hand, those who advocate for imprisonment argue that the stricter the punishment becomes, the less the crime occurs. To be specific, when lawbreakers are locked away from the community, they are deprived of re-offending.

For example

, a notable study conducted by Korea University in 2011 revealed that countries with strong punishments like imprisonment were likely to have low crime rates.

In addition

, the experts concluded that the threat of serving a prison sentence may deter

others

from breaking the law.

Moreover

, jails provide an opportunity for rehabilitation as inmates can be educated through various programs and

thus

, easily reintegrate into associations.

On the other hand

,

others

contend that alternatives like community service, probation, fines, or counselling can be more favourable ways to deal with felons.

For instance

, by undertaking community service, offenders can repay their debt to nations and contribute positively to the public.

This

not only benefits those directly involved but

also

sends a message to civilizations that there are consequences for legal actions.

Furthermore

, imprisoning all criminals is highly ineffective, as it is a waste of money. It is true that it requires a lot of budget and widened space to manage the accommodation. In conclusion,

while

some individuals say that all culprits should be sent to prison,

others

believe that it is not always the best solution.

However

, I think that a mitigated approach is crucial as every solution is advantageous.