Some people believe that there should be 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 punishment. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some

people

argue that fixed punishment should be used for each type of criminal while others think that the situation of every offender and their motivation should be considered more to give the final verdict. From my point of view, I strongly agree with the latter view. On the one hand,

people

could support for fixed sentence for some reason.

To begin

with, using fixed punishment is able to save time and money for both

judge

and culprit.

For instance

, if

people

commit the same crime, they will receive the same punishment.

In addition

, the

judge

and the lawyer do not spend too much time investigating and arguing.

Besides

, all criminals would find it fairer.

For instance

, there are some cases that have crime reduction cause the defendant bribes the

judge

to help them.

On the other hand

, circumstances and motivation for committing offenders need to be considered more for some reasons.

First

of all,

people

who have mental illness and young

people

might have crime reduction because they do not have enough awareness and knowledge in life.

For instance

, if a teenager has no clue about foods that contain poisons

such

as sprouted potatoes or poisonous mushrooms, she or he might cook for someone and kill them accidentally.

Secondly

, if someone commits a criminal to self-defence from dangers, the

judge

should decrease their sentence. To sum up, fixed sentences could have some advantages like declining the time and money or being fair for every offender,

however

, the judiciary system and lawyers still need to focus on the situations and the major reason why defendants do illegal activities.