Prison has long been the traditional punishment for people who commit crimes. Some people believe, however, that community service orders are more appropriate in some cases. When do you think that it is right to order people to work in the community to pay for their crimes?

It has never been straightforward to know how to decide to punish criminals for their actions. It does seem clear, though, in this day and age that work in the community is a viable alternative to custodial sentences for minor offences and, perhaps, in cases where there are mitigating factors. In this essay, I attempt to explain when I believe these community service orders should be made.

The first set of circumstances when community work is the appropriate sanction is for less serious offences when the offender shows remorse for his actions. Part of the reason for this is that it may be wrong to take away someone’s livelihood by sending them to prison, simply because they have written graffiti on a wall. Likewise, there is a significant danger that these minor offenders would become hardened criminals if they spent time with career criminals in prison. I would emphasise, however, that it should be a condition that the criminal regrets his actions and it is only appropriate for first time offenders.

The other major instance when there is a strong argument to order people to work in the community is when their crimes are unlikely to be repeated. For example, someone who has caused an accident and been caught driving when drunk may not be sent to prison if they were driving their pregnant wife to hospital. In this case, it seems much better if they are ordered to help the community in some way such as working in a shelter for the homeless.

In summary, prison is in my view not always the best sanction and there are certain circumstances when non-custodial sentences may be both more effective