Several people assert that the main cause of crime is an economically disadvantaged background.
However, others say that crime is caused by a person's nature.
Discuss both ideas and give your own opinion.
Many people believe that an economically disadvantaged environment causes a crime. Nevertheless, some people assert that the main cause of crime is a person’s nature considering the criminals who have psychopathic characteristics. This issue is contentious because there are logical reasons and examples to each cause.
Firstly, several people believe that the principle trigger of crime is a poverty because the people who were raised in poor neighborhood perceive the crime less severely. It is well-known fact that there is a possibility of being exposed to the crime frequently when children live in an economically disadvantaged background. For example, people in a poor town commit theft and robbery for their living. As this shows, the people in an unprivileged environment can think a crime as a living. Therefore, it is evident that crime is caused by a poverty.
On the other hand, there are some people who believe that a person’s nature causes crime. This is because the criminals with a psychopathic or sociopathic disposition have different way of thinking. Many experts insist that these characteristics can be concealed by education but they are revealed by crime at the end. For instance, there are many reported criminals who had been well-educated and had the prestige jobs. This clearly illustrates that an antisocial way of thinking leads to a crime. For this reason, it is undeniable that the main cause of crime is a human nature.
To sum up, it is clear that there are many reasons for an environmental cause of crime because of a frequent expose to the crime. However, there are significant reasons for an argument that a person’s nature causes a crime because of criminal’s antisocial way of thinking.
반복 피하려고 하기는 하는데 주요 단어라고 해야하나 이 글에서 nature 같은 단어는 잘 바꿔지지가 않네요ㅜㅜ 정확히 대체가능한 단어가 뭔지 확신이 없어서 그런것같아요ㅜ 아무튼 첨삭 감사합니다!!