- 分享到:
题目要求：
Prison is useless for crime problems and education can be better solution. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
参考翻译：
【有人认为监狱并不能解决犯罪问题，教育可能是更好的措施】
分析：
这是一道【A/D】比较型考试类型，题目中就解决犯罪问题方面，是否“教育”比“关监狱”更有效果进行提问
解题要点词：
1. useless：不同意，关监狱对于解决犯罪还是起着一定的威慑作用
2. better：可以同意，可以从长远角度考虑，“预防与未然
所以建议观点可以侧一边倒或采用让步论证法。
文中词汇使用灵活，学术词汇使用较丰富；文中一些从句的使用为文章增色；行文稍欠流畅，应适当增加连接词的使用。
For those person who perpetrate crime that be sent into prison seemly is the best way to solve crime problem in society.However, this way suffered some opponents who think the best mean to decrease the rate of crime should be adopted from education.I think it is a wealth problem to be discussed. Maybe,the image of prison is filled with so indifference and scared that make people never want to do illegal things again.However,the results achieved by setting up prison are not so obvious due to the lack of mind of law for offenders.So,I think validity measures that can promote people' minds on the law should be taken,which refers the fundamental education that be advocated by many people.Firstly,correct values can be built during the First thing first, accept that sending criminals to prison is an effective, if not the only way, to protect society. Stop thinking in terms of education as "punishment" for a moment and instead think about safeguarding innocent people from incorrigible violent sex offenders, trigger-happy drug dealers, and cold-blooded murderers. Education does reduce crimes to some extent; however, it is doubtful if most of them would choose to live a life that is crime-free. Since most inmates eventually return to the community, it seems not a bad idea to help them learn a trade and gain skills to make a decent living. And that is why training programs are often believed to be positive in changing criminal behavior. Nevertheless, most statistics tend to tell a different story. As it is, rather than becoming productive members of society, they turn themselves into more skilled criminals. So it is one thing that rehabilitation offers opportunities; it is quite another whether career criminals make good use of their prison time. In most cases, after serving their terms they continue commiting offences of a more sophisticated kind. Education is more a romantic option than an effective solution for crime problems. At this point, it must be made clear that the argument is not against education in correctional facilities, considering that most inmates are under-educated. Rather, the case is concerned about a control policy to strictly supervise specific released prisoners for at least two years to observe what might happen to society. Here, skeptics claim that, in many cases, prison education produces nothing more than "better-educated criminals", only more dangerous. That the violent crime wave is raging while most prisons are over-crowded certainly does not reflect a significant decrease in recidivism. It merely shows the fear and impotence of innocent people in the community. The point is that sending criminals to prison is effective, if only by moving them away from the community. On the other hand, to regard prison education as an effective "punishment" is simply wishful-thinking, in view of relevant evidence that underlies recidivism. In all events, education provides opportunities, however limited, but it depends on the way those repeat offenders see these opportunities, the rest being pure guessing.
