A highly debated problem currently relates to the types of punishment, with some people arguing about whether prison is the most effective method for reducing crime. Although imprisonment discourages people from committing a crime, I also believe that it is unwise to use this approach for all types of the law-breaking.
It is true that prison plays a significant role in public safety for various reasons. The first reason is it helps the government to separate the people who pose a threat to other people from society. Individuals committing crimes, such as assault, drug-trafficking or rape, are dangerous for their fellow citizens, because there is always a likelihood that they will re-offend. Therefore, imprisonment enables authorities to prevent potential crimes. In addition, imprisoning criminals on a large-scale raises a sense of fear for other citizens. Subsequently, any other people become less likely to break the law.
Albeit to its certain benefits, prison is not the most effective way of punishment. In my opinion, using alternatives is more productive in some cases. For instance, small-scale crimes like pickpocketing or vandalism should be punished through hefty fines, community service or curfews. Furthermore, we can rehabilitate criminals by educational trainings, and use electronic tagging for the safety.
In conclusion, many people claim that prison is the most powerful method for reducing the crime rate, because it really makes society a better place, separating the violent people. Nevertheless, as this is not an appropriate form of the punishment for all sorts of crime, government has to implement other alternatives.