Many people believe that having a fixed punishment for all crimes is more efficient. What are the advantages and disadvantages of having a fixed punishment.

It is thought by most of the people that when there is a permanent disciplining for all offences, it is advantageous.

Although

, people are fearing to do deletes because of

this

, can not punish according to the severity of the crime. Nowadays, the rate of offences is gradually increasing and for a peaceful community it is not a suitable option. On one hand, it is a valuable decision, if there is a common sentence.

Then

people will know the result of the wrongs that they have done and afraid to do them again. Because of

this

, reduce the amount of culprits within the public.

For example

, if the death penalty order for any level of wrongs, sometimes the public will, not only think to steal others belongings but

also

even to look at them.

Therefore

, a well established disciplining is useful to change the mind of the community regarding the wrong behaviours.

On the other hand

, the castings must depend on the weight of the crime.

Otherwise

, people are not a threat for the

guility

responsible for or chargeable with a reprehensible act

guilty

. They will perform any level of offences, if there is a sane decision. To illustrate, the person who fights today, he will kill the man tomorrow,

hence

, there is no difference between the punishments. It will be a cause to reduce the fear for the wrong and

then

improve the number of culprits. According to the aforementioned reasons, people will take it easy on offences. In conclusion, while more people agree with having an equal penalizing for the all wrongs is beneficial, from the side of the criminal, it is not a valuable decision. Because, it is an unfair solution while compare with the severity of the guilt and it creates the wrong image within the society about the law.

Moreover

, people will not recognize the deletes as inappropriate behaviours.