Prompt: 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 danger of committing a crime. To what extent do you agree or disagree? ex-convict teacher

People have different views about whether ex-criminals will be a good teacher for keeping children away from committing crim. In my opinion, I complete agree that ex-prisoners' experiences are the best material to educate teenagers. Ċ It is more persuasive than other teaching methods to preach the harm of crime. People who are rehabilitated after prison sentence can teach teenager what kinds of consequences they have after committing a crime, such as losing several years of freedom and having difficulties to find a job in the future, especially for the children who consider about criminals leading glamorous lives. In addition, it provides a distinctive prospective to reconsider the crime, which is rare for normal teachers or parents. And I doubt that adolescents would see teachers as credible sources of information about this topic. For example, school teachers usually teach the children by textbook and lack of objective feelings after breaking the law. Ċ On the other hand, it helps reformed criminals achieve self-value. That means people who have crime record will not feel that they are useless to society and have determination to become a good citizen. Meanwhile teaching teenagers is a method of repaying society. With something to do after prison sentence, ex-offenders are less likely to break the law again. If not, criminals may have tendency to commit a crime again as the public usually discriminate and stay away from them. Ċ In conclusion, I fully support the view that people who have turned around their lives after serving a prison sentence could help to deter teenagers from being a lawbreaker.