Crime and punishment

Opinions differ on how a society should deal with crime. Some people believe that longer prison sentences are the answer, while others prefer different approaches. In my view, prison is necessary for serious crimes, but other measures are more effective in reducing crime overall.

Those who support longer sentences make two main points. First, they argue that harsh punishment discourages people from committing crimes, because the cost of being caught is higher. Second, a long sentence keeps dangerous criminals away from the public, and so it protects potential victims. For violent offenders in particular, this protection is important.

On the other hand, there is evidence that long sentences do not always reduce crime. Many offenders are not thinking about the length of a sentence when they commit a crime, and some leave prison with fewer skills and fewer job prospects than before, so they are more likely to offend again. Programmes that teach prisoners a trade or help them to finish their education can reduce this risk. In the same way, community service for minor offences allows people to repay society while keeping their jobs and family ties.

Prevention also deserves attention. When young people have access to good schools, sport and employment, they are less likely to turn to crime in the first place, and this is cheaper than keeping people in prison for many years.

In conclusion, while longer sentences have a place for the most serious crimes, I believe that education, training and prevention offer a better long-term solution to crime.

Why it works

• Both views are given a full paragraph, and the writer's own opinion appears in the introduction and conclusion.
• Linking phrases such as on the other hand and in the same way are used naturally, not in every sentence.
• Examples are general and sensible, so the argument is clear without needing exact statistics.