Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later, and it is often argued that these are the best people to talk to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime. To what extent do you agree or disagree.

40 minutes, 250 words at least.

Answer:

Prison sentence may help criminals to become a (do not use article ‘A’ with plural citizens) good citizens in the future. There is an assumption that ex-prisoners are the best ones taking to talk (1) about the drawbacks of committing crimes for youngsters. It is an absolute truth, in my opinion, (keep it simple) I strongly support this since prisoners can talk about the crimes’ consequences of crimes and the (parallelism) limitations in teenagers’ lives.

1. What is the difference between talking and to talk? Why should we use to talk here? WATCH the VIDEO.

The paragraph structuring is good. But, there are numerous grammar mistakes.

One of the reasons for using ex-prisoners talking to talk about the crimes’ drawbacks of crimes for teenagers is, that they are familiar with the consequences of committing crimes better than anyone else. They not only experienced prison sentences themselves but also saw life-sentence or execution for other prisoners. Furthermore, by talking about the crimes’ severe punishments, (2) kids may understand clearly that every action has its own (redundant) drawbacks and they should be very careful about their action in the society. From a psychological standpoint, the ex-prisoners’ talking about crimes consequences of crimes is the best deterrent in committing crimes in teenagers (weird structure) deters youngsters from committing crimes.

2. This is a modifier – by talking about the severe punishments. Since the modifier is linked to kids, it means that KIDS are talking. Not ex-prisoners. KIDS can’t talk, but they can LISTEN. Furthermore, by listening to the first-hand accounts of severe punishments, kids may understand …….

Though you’ve developed the ideas well, there are sentence structuring issues (kids talking, deterrent).

In addition, while teenagers should know about the limitation which crimes will bring about, and the ex-prisoners play the vital roles in this issue (3). For instance, the prisoners are deprived of seeing their family and friends, using the internet and social media during prison times and after coming out of prison they have difficulty in finding a job and socialize with others after coming out of the prison (Follow the rules of parallelism – First words of X, Y and Z are (deprived of) seeing, using, and finding.). These limitations lead to isolation which is dangerous for forces (compels) (wrong word choice – Lexical Resource) ex-prisoners to recommit the crimes or become depressed. Talking about the crimes’ limitation is beneficial for teenagers to think twice before committing crimes. 

3. Wrong connecting device – while is used for expressing contrast or mentioning that two things occur simultaneously. None of them applies in this case. The correct way to write this sentence is: In addition, the ex-prisoners play a vital role in developing the youngsters’ understanding (the understanding of youngsters) about the limitations which crime bring about.

Your ideas and explanation are adequate. However, there are sentence structuring issues. Try to use the most appropriate words (not difficult) words to maintain a good lexical resource score.

In conclusion, due to the various positive effects of knowing a crime’s drawbacks, it seems to be of paramount importance for teenagers to listen to ex-prisoners. In doing so, in my opinion, it is the governments’ responsibility to pass a law to help schools in order allow schools to invite ex-prisoners for talking about the crimes’ drawbacks (the drawbacks of crimes).

Follow this blog and like our Facebook page to learn exciting new essays and cue cards. You can contact me HERE.

Please subscribe to my Youtube Channel.

Contact me for writing polished and effective Statement of Purpose.

Contact me for Editing Services and Document Writing Services.