Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime. Others think that the circumstances of a crime, and the reason for committing it should be considered when deciding on the punishment. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Should the law be flexible while deciding about

punishments

for

criminals

? There are two opposite opinions about

punishments

for

crimes

. some parts of society believe there should be fixed retributions for each type of

crime

whereas others have the opposite view and think different

reasons

should be considered in deciding about

crimes

. The

first

group believes all people are equal before the law, so it is completely fair that

punishments

for all

criminals

who commit the same

crime

are the same. They think there should not be any expectations for anyone in facing legislation.

for example

, we know that stealing is a

crime

in all countries, so stealing by anyone and anywhere should be considered a

crime

. But others believe all circumstances and

reasons

should be considered in deciding on

punishments

because different people have diverse statuses mentally. So

criminals

have various

reasons

and motivations for committing

crimes

and many factors are included in

crimes

. they think it is unfair if those

reasons

, mental features, and conditions are not concerned. Someone who does not have stable mental status and commits a

crime

while he/she has an unstable situation, should not be punished in the same way that a normal criminal with a steady mental situation does. I think everyone who commits a

crime

has diverse

reasons

, motivations, and positions compared to other

criminals

. So the law should consider all circumstances and select a punishment based on the situations that which the guilty committed a

crime

because it is more Justly and fairly.