Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime. Others. However, argue that circumstances of an individual crime and the motivation for committing it, should always be taken into account. Discuss both side and give your opinion.

Generally, it was widely noticeable in society that some citizens think crime punishment should depend on the circumstances and the nature of the cases.

Nevertheless

, the rest of the people consider each crime should be regaled with fixed punishments

according to

the laws. In my opinion, the former one is wiser.

This

essay will elaborate on both perspectives in subsequent paragraphs. On the one hand, unlike cases that have varied situations, courts can't jump to conclusions without careful scale and judgments. Regardless of the specific details of the case can not be called equity,

according to

diverse motivations, these cases have very different natures.

For instance

, justifiable

defense

Change the spelling

defence

show examples

and harm caused have different characteristics but they may cause the same consequences.

On the other hand

, supporters of fixed punishment emphasize that they help maintain societal order by setting clear boundaries and expectations for

behavior

Change the spelling

behaviour

show examples

. They argue that individuals are aware of their actions beforehand, which may act as a deterrent.

Moreover

, fixed punishment could help in reducing biases and

favoritism

Change the spelling

favouritism

show examples

by removing the discretion of judges and ensuring equal treatment under the law.

To sum up

,

while

fixed punishments may provide a sense of equality and simplicity, the circumstances and motivations have always been taken into account during sentencing. Justice should be fair, considering the unique aspects of each case, A system that allows for flexibility ensures that the punishments fit each crime and allows potential factors to be considered.