Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime. Others, however, argue that the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Penalties applied to criminals are essentially the judges´ responsibility and,

therefore

, it is thought by many, that the motive and the individual circumstance of a

crime

should be considered thoroughly by them before making the final sentence. I think, oppositely, that every criminal punishment should be fixed for each different type of

crime

regardless of their context and in

this

essay I will explain why. On the one hand, those who support taking into account the circumstances of an individual

crime

,

Accept space

,

argue that in

this

way, more fair punishments can be given. Different motivations may deserve different length of time in jail,

for example

, assaulting for fun or to make harm must have a larger condemn than a person that assaults to feed his or her children

,

Accept space

,

in which manner could be released and offered to do community work to pay for their mistake

instead

.

On the other hand

, many others, consider that punishing in a fixed and strict way makes the community follow the rules. Jail,

for instance

, is an effective deterrent for people committing a

crime

. Nobody wants to go to prison, take,

for example

, in Argentina, since the introduction of fixed punishments, the percentage of

crime

has been reduced to half because people know what serious consequences have to break the law. In conclusion, whereas many think individual reasons to commit a

crime

and its social context should be considered to decide the punishment given, I believe fixed and strict penalties must be applied. In

this

manner, not only the amount of felonies will be reduced, but

also

the criminals will have the proper and deserved punishment for breaking the laws.