what to reply for my peer for replying to my post saying (In your post, you provided a well-supported argument for the importance of incorporating rehabilitation into sentencing, especially in light of the flaws in outdated data that initially influenced the Sentencing Reform Act. I found your use of Patch's research particularly convincing, especially the point about over 40% of offenders being rearrested within three years of release. This clearly illustrates the need for rehabilitation programs that equip offenders with the necessary skills to reintegrate into society and reduce recidivism. One point that stood out to me was your argument that "returning unimproved prisoners to society is an unwise correctional policy." This really drives home the message that without proper rehabilitation, we are setting up both the offenders and society for future problems. Even if someone were to argue for harsher sentencing, your focus on long-term outcomes shows that rehabilitation is key to protecting society in the future. It might be interesting to explore potential counterarguments, such as concerns about the cost and effectiveness of implementing these programs universally. That could strengthen your response by acknowledging other perspectives and further justifying why rehabilitation is crucial despite these challenges. Overall, your argument is very well-rounded, and the research you provided supports your points convincingly