In many parts of the world, it is common for authorities to enforce stricter laws and extend length of imprisonment in order to reduce conviction rates. Although these new regulations could potentially serve as a crime prevention factor for the citizens and maintain overall security of a country, I still hold an opinion that disadvantages of this trend outweigh its benefits because it may foster more serious criminal behaviour and such a system may not consider the personal circumstances on trial.
One compelling argument in favour of promoting harsh punishment such as longer prison sentences and stricter law regulations for a committed offence is that a demonstrated penalty in front of the public can act as a deterrent for the rest of the society. In other words, citizens who witnessed that an accused person received a harsh punishment for what they have done against the law will work as a crime prevention factor to be law-abiding residents of a country.
Another benefit of such practice is that it can significantly improve the overall level of security within a country. This is due to the fact that offenders who receive longer prison sentences are physically prevented from committing a crime. This may be particularly efficient in cases of repeat offenders, who are more likely to reoffend after being released. Therefore, keeping dangerous criminals in prisons can reduce the immediate risk to the public. As a result, such harshness towards offenders’ crime punishment can lead to lower conviction rates within a country through citizens’ awareness of how they will be punished for their offence and keeping accused people physically prevented from breaking laws.
However, implementation of such penalty standards can increase the severity of crime. If relatively minor and serious offences are both punished extremely harshly, criminals may feel that they have little to lose, and therefore, it is better to commit one serious crime than several minor offences. As a result, stricter sentencing may increase the severity of some crimes rather than prevent them. Another significant drawback of such practice is a rigid sentencing system may prevent judges from taking individual circumstances into account. From the moral perspective, it is unfair to judge the individual’s action against law without considering their social and environmental conditions and what drove them to act this way. For instance, a person who is homeless in the winter has no other choice but to commit an offence like entering someone else’s house or robbery in a struggle for survival. Thus, this policy can be disadvantageous because of increased seriousness of offence and immorality of a judging system.
To sum up, the government policy of stricter laws and longer prison sentences has clear benefits such as building a law-abiding society, and ensuring public safety. However, it does have undeniable limitations like fostering the seriousness of crime, and such a verdict based on a system cannot be morally justifiable. Taking both sides into consideration, I am inclined to believe that the drawbacks of this trend outweigh its advantages.