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 is true that people who use to be imprisoned before can be rehabilitated and become useful members of society again. I completely agree with the idea that allowing ex-prisoners to talk to teenagers is the best way of preventing youth crimes.

The most important reason is that ex-prisoners have real-life experiences which is of great educational value to teenagers. Most prisoners regret what they have done after committing crimes, which usually happen under compulsion. It is a well-known fact that the contributing factor to youth crimes has been the lack of self-control and rational thinking. For example, the suspect of several campus shooting occurred in America all shared one common trait: unusually low resilience and compulsive behavior. Therefore I believe those ex-prisoners can teach them a vital lesson on how to self-control and be calm when facing difficulties.

Alternatively, schools and institutions could invite police officers or professors of public security to host a lecture on the danger of criminal activity. However, these methods would not be as effective as real stories told by ex-criminals. Teenagers are under a sensitive time when they become doubtful of authorities, forceful and compulsory teaching will not serve them any good. In fact, these methods could do just the opposite. On the other hand, true stories are shocking in nature and more easily accepted by the youth. For example, anti-drug films which depict the life of a drug addict from his first person view usually receive higher popularity than those depicted from the view-point of police.

In conclusion, I would argue that implementing ex-prisoners in anti-crime education is absolutely necessary as their life could be a powerful demonstration to deter youth crimes.