Sample essays for FIXED PUNISHMENTS (Question 6)

Fixing punishments for each type of crime has been a debatable issue.
There are many arguments supporting both views, those for and those against
fixed punishments.
On the one hand, fixed punishments will have a deterring effect on society.
Individuals knowing that they will be subject to a certain punishment if they are
convicted with a given crime, will reconsider committing this act in the first place.
This deterring effect also leads to social stability and security, through minimizing
the number of crimes committed. If people knew they would be able to convince
the court or the jury of a reason for having committed the crime they are accused
of, penal decisions would be largely arbitrary. This would result into criminals
getting away with their crimes and into a high level of injustice caused by the
subjective approach of different courts.
On the other hand, taking the circumstances of a crime and its motivation
into consideration is a prerequisite for establishing and ensuring justice and
equity. A person killing in self-defense cannot be compared to a serial killer,
moving from one victim to the next.
In my opinion an intermediary position between both solutions is the perfect
way to establish and ensure justice and equity. There have to be fixed
punishments for all crimes. However, criminal laws have to provide for a minimum
and a maximum for the punishment and the laws also have to foresee certain
cases of exemptions. An example for setting minimum and maximum penalties is
Competition Law where a person being held liable of a crime under this law will be
convicted to pay a fine, according to the harm caused by the violation and the
profit gained by the violator through committing the crime. As for the exemptions,
in some countries the law exempts thieves stealing food during period of famine
taking into consideration the distress and hunger. Also, a person killing in selfdefense will be exempted from punishment.

Why ex-offenders should be given a role in cutting youth crime

Ex-prisoners have a lot to teach young people and will be listened to, says
Stewart Dakers

Ex-prisoners know the streets, the youth on them, and what is in their
heads. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty images
Stewart Dakers
As the justice system struggles to address youth crime, there is one
resource which could do more to retrieve and reform young people, to divert them
from crime, and to restore a positive attitude in them than a dozen public
enquiries and a battalion of QCs.
The people who know the streets, the youth on them, and what is in their
heads, are people who have been there themselves, ex-prisoners. Yet they are
never consulted.
I have worked with a number of ex-prisoners over the past ten years. I have
witnessed their workshops, and seen the results. They are truly impressive.
Agencies like UserVoice, Foundation4Life, and YouthempowermentCDS, are just
some of the many initiatives undertaken by prisoners on release as they seek to
put something back.
They are managed by ex-prisoners and employ other ex-prisoners. Selection
is rigorous, training robust and supervision exemplary. These are remarkable men
and women with an impressive product.
They deliver workshops across the country which aim to divert young
people from crime by developing their sense of personal responsibility, by

confronting them with the victims of crime, their families, and the community.
They show them the consequences of crime for themselves and their life chances.
These are the only people who enjoy genuine credibility with 'the yoof'. It is
not just that they have been there and got the T shirt. They know why the young
people misbehave, because they did it themselves. They know how to encourage
personal responsibility because they have acquired it the hard way. They know the
consequences of crime, because they have experienced them big time, and still
do. They know what triggers to squeeze, what sanctions to impose.
And they deliver. They have acquired a portfolio of skills in engaging with
young people, which are beyond the imagination of the chuntering classes and,
yes, most of the professionals. Time and again, I have watched a dozen young
people, who would normally be off the wall within five minutes of attending a
class, sit spellbound for two hours.
I have watched them at lunch break deep in conversation before returning
for a further two hours still paying attention. It is a powerful, intense two-way
process, with each, ex-cons and youth, exchanging painful, personal stuff,
opening up, being vulnerable, sharing fears and hopes. In the pain and the tears,
the young people rediscover a sense of purpose and of self. This is truly remedial
work and it works.
Unfortunately I have also witnessed the uphill struggle ex-offenders face.
This is genuine resettlement, yet they continue to confront prejudice and
incredulity. They are sidelined, ignored in the corridors. For all the extraordinary
work they do, they remain engaged in a constant battle to make their voices
heard, while political ears attend to the purveyors of judicial snake oil and the
lucrative contracts are awarded to faithful amateurs.
The corridors are intellectually bankrupt on this issue but the cells have
more than enough wisdom to confront it. We possess a rich seam of unused
talent. Let's use it.

TOPIC: Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later.
Some people think that having these people to give a talk to school
students is the best way to tell them about dangers of committing a
crime. Do you agree or disagree?
Sample 1: Crime education is of paramount importance in any country, but the
way it can be conducted is often a subject of debate in society. While I agree that
asking those who are released from prison to have a talk to school students is a
good education method, I also believe that there are better alternatives to the
problem, as will now be discussed.
On the one hand, I agree that students may be aware of the consequences
of engaging in criminal activities when attending a talk given by ex-prisoners.
Their life stories are often vivid and persuasive, and this can attract the attention
of school students easily. These ex-criminals are real examples that people have
to pay for their unlawful activities, which can raise awareness about law-abiding
citizens among young people. The success of a series of educational programs on
Vietnamese Television channels about the price that offenders have to pay proves
that the narrative forms of crime education can work. It is hoped that a speech of
used-to-be wrongdoers is promoted at all school levels in future.
However, I believe that a combination of different education methods would
produce a more desirable result compared to a former prisoner holding a talk.
Primarily, parents should act as pioneers to educate children at an early age
about social evils and how to avoid them. It has long been acknowledged that the
home environment has a profound effect on the development of a child, and a
significant percentage of juvenile crime stems from insufficient education
criminals receive in their childhood. Teachers at schools also play an important
role in raising the awareness of students about crime. Moral lessons ought not to
be neglected in the classroom, and a positive education environment should be
promoted, contributing to crime prevention.
In conclusion, it is my opinion that a talk given by ex-offenders, albeit
effective, is not the best education method for crime education.

Sample 2:
Crime education for school students has long been a major topic of concern
in society. There is a common belief that talks by ex-prisoners should be held at
school to inform students of the threats when a crime is committed. While I accept
that this practice is beneficial in a few ways, I believe there are many better
measures of crime prevention.
There are certain benefits of having ex-prisoners talking to students about
the hazards that are associated with crimes. The most obvious benefit is to
educate students about the general knowledge of crimes. Those who committed a
crime surely have gathered knowledge about crimes and the common motives of
crimes, not only from their wrongdoings but also from communication with other
criminals. From this, students may learn the early signs of crimes, what they
should be aware of to enhance self-regulation to prevent crimes. In addition, exprisoners are those who underwent a long process of imprisonment and
rehabilitation, so their life-stories are often a great source of real-life experiences
of not only what prisoners are deprived of but also how regretful they feel. These
stories, once verbalised, may deter students from carrying out a crime.
However, I am convinced that there are better solutions to prevent crimes.
The most important measure is to introduce criminology as a subject at school,
with both compulsory taught lessons and student-centred seminars. While lifestories of ex-prisoners are often biased, criminology knowledge is scientifically
proven based on a large set of data and is much more reliable than a few single
persons stories. With this method, students can learn all the necessary
knowledge about crimes through the lens of science and therefore have a holistic
view on crimes and crime prevention. The other measure is to film the harsh daily
lives of prisoners and show it to school students. Ex-prisoners talks can be
persuasive, but films with vivid images are be much more visually attractive to
students and thus have a greater deterrent impact.
To conclude, I am of the opinion that although talks by ex-prisoners are of
good values to school students, there are stronger crime-prevention measures
such as the introduction of criminology as a school subject.

Sample 3:
It is said that people who have been released from prison and shown good
citizenship should be given chances to tell students about the risks of being an
offender. While I agree that it is a good idea, the orientation of the media is also
equally important.
On the one hand, people put to jail could help prevent school students from
being prisoners. In other words, from their real experience, they could vividly tell
about their feelings after committing a crime, and the difficulties in the way to
reintegrate into the community. From these stories, up to a point, students are
warned about strictness of the law and consequences of being out of control. As a
result, unexpected things would not be repeated.
Nevertheless, the idea of giving opportunies for reformed prisoners to talk
to young teenagers at school solely could sometimes lead to negative effects. In
some cases, yound students could even idolize blindly sinners who have perfect
ways to commit their crimes if school authorities have no idea to orient them. For
example, a man who used his knowledge to illegally fight against the authority
with sound-good reasons might receive many empathies from students. If the
media does not lead to the right way or intends to lead to the wrong one, the
representation of these offenders would make students doing wrongly.
In conclusion, talks from people who used to go to the jail to students are
necessary to help minimize the repeat of the pitiful stories if the media and the
authority could have the right orientation.