In the contemporary world, a large proportion of individuals contend that punishments for crimes should be fixed,
while
others highlight the opposite, considering the fairness and deterrence associated with each. Linking Words
This
essay will discuss both perspectives. Linking Words
While
fixed sentencing promotes deterrence and consistency, I contend discretionary approach is more crucial in aligning the punishment with the moral weight of crime.
On the one hand, fixed punishments seem to contribute the society more convenience and are able to deter crime in the most effective way. Linking Words
For example
, draconian laws in ancient China, harsh repercussions Linking Words
such
as severing the hands of people Linking Words
due to
theft , not only disregarded the complexity of individual situations but Linking Words
also
violated fundamental human rights. Linking Words
Furthermore
, sentencing and judging the perpetrators from the perspective of predetermined sanctions will foster an unfair law framework , and some wealthy criminals who have the power to get lighter punishment will lead to potentially repeated offences, indeed.
Linking Words
On the other hand
, in charge of ensuring fairness and applying the laws with flexibility. Not all crimes are committed with malicious intent. Linking Words
For example
, there can be a crime that has been committed because of self-defence; Linking Words
likewise
, Linking Words
this
kind of offence needs to be distinguished from premeditated action.A flexible legal framework allows judges to differentiate between crimes committed with nefarious intent and those driven by external pressures, ensuring a more balanced and humane approach to justice.
In conclusion, Linking Words
whereas
some argue that predetermined punishments are better to deter homicide and contribute to society a consistency, criminals need to be subjected to sentence judgmentally by authorities based on the specific case.Linking Words