To deter crime from occur, governments should provide their citizens with better standard of life. However, some people think that severe punishment may be an effective method to crime prevention. From my point of view, I strongly agree with the former due to the following reasons and in this essay, I will discuss both sides of argument.
First of all, governments and authorities should offer their residents better living conditions such as shelter, occupation, food,… because unemployment is one of the key factors leading humans to commit crimes. Therefore, the young can be motivated to seek their own jobs and earn money by themselves. Furthermore, living in a safe and pleasant environment makes people always optimistic and delighted. For example, if you struggle to make a living, authorities will give a hand to your family with pensions and other offers. Thanks to governments’ actions, it not only assists you in stabilizing your life, but you also feel satisfied when you can solve the problem quickly.
However, the threat of punishment may be a far superior approach to prevent offences. Serious punishments are paying fines and jailing. This method has negative impacts on both crime’s physical and mental healths. For instance, when comes to paying fines, crimes can not pay enough money due to their backgrounds. If you were in their shoes, you would feel disappointed and bored.
To conclude, improving the quality of life is a moral approach to crime deterrence rather than the threat of punishment. By this way, people can be encouraged to get access to new opportunities. Moreover, the rate of crime will also be reduced when applying this approach to our society.