Some people believe that there should be a fixed punishment 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 of these two views and give your own opinion.

Raphael Astor Zardalian One of the highly controversial topics nowadays is whether the judiciary system should establish fixed sentences for all crimes, or if it should consider the circumstances and motive behind each and every

crime

. These days, depravity is a much bigger problem than back in the old days. Some people believe that it’s better to adopt fixed punishments for each type of felony since it’s more effective, much easier to implement and ensures equality, while others are convinced that it’s better to judge each

crime

as an individual, based on the situation.

Initially

, fixed punishments have enormous advantages in achieving effectiveness and justice. Above all, a given set of rules is certainly easier to implement and leads to a more effective process if we compare it with a flexible approach to punish criminals.

In other words

, fixed punishments will save a lot of time and money that could

otherwise

be directed for use in much needed services to the community

such

as health and education since.

This

is because the judges would not need to determine what type of

punishment

criminals would deserve as it would have been already decided for them.

In addition

to that,

this

would definitely make court proceedings a lot quicker.

Also

, it allows criminals to be treated fairly for their crimes for the reason that it’s important to ensure no one gets discriminated and most importantly, there will be no differentiation between the criminals who committed the same kind of

crime

.

Additionally

,

crime rate

Suggestion

the crime rate

crime rates

would definitely decline. People will be more cautious in their daily activities to prevent any criminal act, because they would already be knowing their fate if they ever commit a

crime

. Simply put, criminals will think twice before they commit any

crime

, as they would realize that

punishment

is going to be swift and strict. One good illustration of

this

is the declined rate of crimes in some countries that adopt a very strict and harsh punitive system.

On the other hand

, a simple principle can’t cover changeable situations. There should be some considerations of what were the motives of

crime

and

also

the background of criminals. There must be a different

punishment

between a serial killer and someone who was forced to kill for self-defending. Applying same

punishment

to the woman who stole a loaf of bread from a store to feed her hungry baby and a corrupt government employee who stole millions of dollars to pile up his wealth is not at all justified though stealing was the

crime

in both cases.

Moreover

, flexible sentences are more equal, compassionate and humane and it would

also

facilitate the respect of the public for the authority. To recap, some people believe that fixed punishments are more able to maintain efficiency, equality between criminals much faster and easier than judging people based on the circumstances and motive of each

crime

. I personally believe that, fixed punishments are undoubtedly necessary to make sure the effective process of the penalty system.

Nevertheless

, we still have to make room for flexibilities and consider every

crime

as an individual.