Original practice question
Some people believe that a prison sentence is the most effective way to reduce crime. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
- 1
Position
Disagree that prison is the most effective default. It restrains a person for a fixed period, and for many offences a supervised order in the community changes the week that produced the offence more than a cell does.
- 2
Body paragraph 1
- Point
- While someone is inside, they cannot commit the offence on that street, which is a real, narrow effect.
- Explanation
- For serious violence, that restraint is the point. The public is protected for the length of the sentence. Calling prison useless ignores the people who are safer because a particular person is not at the door. The claim fails when the same tool is used for thefts that have a different cause.
- Example
- A repeat burglar whose victims on one estate had a quiet year during the sentence, and the same doors forced again three weeks after release.
- 3
Body paragraph 2
- Point
- Most sentences end, and a person who comes out with no work, no stable room and the same debts is back at the cause.
- Explanation
- The cell did not teach a wage. It often cut the ties that might have. Effectiveness has to include the month after release, or the measure is only a pause. Community orders that require work and a supervisor who can see the week are slower to describe and sometimes harder to reoffend around.
- Example
- A theft sentence served as paid hours repairing community halls, with a supervisor who checked attendance, rather than four months that ended at a station with no plan.
- 4
Conclusion
Use prison where the public needs restraint. Do not call it the most effective answer to offences whose cause is still waiting outside.