It is believed by some individuals that all lawbreakers should be taken to prison, while others reject this view and opine that better alternatives, such as community service or skill development, are more effective. I tend to believe that it is a debatable issue, as there are people on both sides with strong logic. In the following paragraphs, I am going to discuss them and explain why I support the latter view.
On the one hand, there is a large group of people, including me, who are totally in favor of the first view. The first argument that the supporters would put forward is that imprisonment helps maintain law and order in society. In other words, it acts as a deterrent for others who might think of breaking the law. Another reason why people support this view is that prisons provide a secure environment to keep dangerous criminals away from society. What I mean by that is that it prevents harm to innocent citizens. For instance, violent offenders can no longer pose a threat to the public once they are imprisoned. That is why I think the arguments for the former view are more logical.
On the other hand, those in favor of the latter opinion have their own arguments that not all lawbreakers deserve imprisonment. They claim that minor offenders, such as those committing petty thefts, can benefit more from community service or skill training. Another point they raise to support their opinion is that such alternatives can help reduce the overcrowding of prisons and save government resources. I believe their logic is also justified to some extent, as these methods focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment.
To sum up, as far as my explanation is concerned, I would like to end by stating that there are convincing arguments for both views. However, I am completely in favor of the latter opinion because I believe alternative methods are more effective in reforming offenders and benefiting society in the long run.