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?

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? 

It has been argued that ex-prisoners are suitable to teach speak to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime for teenagers. In my view, I think it fully benefits both teenagers and ex-offenders.

On the one hand, this is especially true that teenagers listen to what reformed criminals say can avoid their bad behaviors. Teenagers are at a rebellious stage when they are easily influenced by peer pressure and join in gangs. That is to say that juvenile delinquency would occur if they are lack of correct guides. If that kind of reformed offenders could talk about their regrets based on their own crime experience, I suppose it teens would be more likely to accept advice from them. It would be a great way for them to understand the hazards of crimes.

On the other hand, for reformed criminals, giving a lecture for teenagers about crime can help them in the resocialization process. It is acknowledged widely that few companies are willing to employ ex-offenders, so it is difficult for them to make a living. By talking about the evil consequences of crime, they contact more people to integrate into society. They can also inspire pride and a sense of responsibility to lead teenagers to a right direction. It benefits a lot for their future development.

In conclusion, while whether ex-criminals should teach lessons on crime for adolescents has been controversial, I believe completely it have has a good effect for both sides.