Writing Feedback / [IELTS - Writing Task 2] : Discuss both views in penalizing villains. [2]

Hello guys, I just joined this forum.
Right now I am an IELTS learner in English studio.
So I decided to post one of my writing in this forum, I hope someone can give reviews for my essay.
Thank you so much!

Penalizing Offenders

Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments 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 the punishment.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Regulating sentence to be persistent for every case of crime has to be applied, this notion stated by certain communities, while the others' perspective explains that convict's determinations and conditions must be considered in penalizing the suspects. This writing tends to concur with the latter notion since it will reduce the frequency of wrong-targeted punishment, even, the former idea exerts deterrent effects.

Fixed punishment might exert deterrent effects on the punished criminal. This is because this penalty allows citizens to rethink about committing crimes since even they do petty offenses, they still have to face the same conviction given to the one performing massive illegal acts. In addition, the condition happened to the offenders who have finished the damnation will give fear to the others. For instance, in Saudi Arabia, there is a single sentence for a person committing theft that is cutting hand for every offender. This condemnation makes the citizens do not want to do thievery. Still, this writing is in the opposite position of this notion since it will make the citizens think there is no justice in condemning villains.

Considering the suspect's motivation and condition in choosing the punishment for the offenders will anticipate judges for making a wrong conclusion. The judges need more evidence for assuming what is the real fact happened in the scene of a crime. So, if judges examine the villains' determination and circumstances, they will not make a wrong-targeted penalty. For example, in Texas, in 2004, Cameron Todd was executed because he was accused of killing his three daughters. The court stated that he murdered them by burning his house but the new analysis proved that the house was burned accidentally. This essay strongly agrees with this notion, as there are numerous cases like what Cameron faced.

In summary, even persistent punishment can exert the deterrent effects on the villains, wrong-targeted condemnation can only be solved by accounting the situations and determination of the offenders.