Some people believe that there should be fixed punishment for each type of crime. Other, 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 views and give your opinion

These days, one of the most significant challenges in every society is dealing with the escalating crime rate which leads to disastrous chaos and instability. To address

this

issue, two diverse approaches are demonstrated.

While

some individuals are of the view that each crime should have a certain penalty, others think quite the opposite saying that the

overall

condition of the criminals and their intentions should be considered. In

this

essay, I will elaborate on both sides of the argument and explain my own viewpoint. People who believe in a fixed punishment for different sorts of crimes have some debatable reasons. One notable justification for them is that they assume

this

attitude prevents various criminals from being punished with double standards. To exemplify, if there is not a specific penalty for a criminal action

then

a judge has the authority to regulate it himself, and

as a result

, there might be a possibility that some judges be bribed to lower the intensity of the punishments.

Moreover

, the supporters of stable penalties argue that if each culprit dares to justify his lawbreaking in order to reduce his sentence it will definitely be a negative model for

further

criminal activities.

For instance

, some poor people may start burglary hoping that they may get away with it

due to

their circumstances.

On the other hand

, a group of individuals assert that the underlying causes of a crime should not be neglected, and the duration and intensity of a punishment should be based on these factors. Their strongest rationale is that a big portion of each illegal act is the motivation behind that. As an example, someone who steals money to buy food for their starving children should be treated differently than a thief who does it for evil purposes.

In addition

, some individuals break the law because of their mental disorders, so there must be various penalizing rules for each person.

For example

, it might not be fair to sentence a murderer suffering from bipolar disorder to death,

while

it is normal for some other killer to be hanged.

To sum up

,

although

there are two opposing views on how to address lawbreakers and crimes, the second point of view is more aligned with my ideas. I suggest that as we are human beings and not robots, there should not be a fixed pattern for everything and certainly it is better to use our abilities to judge each particular situation regarding its own causes and

then

propose a solution.