Topic: 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.
People have different view about whether punishments for crimes should be fixed. Although there are some advantages of fixed punishment, I believe that it is better to judge each crime individually.
There are some good arguments for having one set punishment for each crime. Firstly, it is easy to make a fair justice system. For instance, death penalty also called capital punishment for corruptors in Indonesia and only death punishment has to prevent the crime rates in community. Secondly, everyone is aware of the punishment for each crime that could deter the number of offenders in their own country over decades.
However, I would argue that the circumstances of a crime and the criminal's motivation should have an influence on the punishment. Stealing for profit in comparison with stealing to feed family is differently responsible for acting. For example, the first group has bad characteristics such as laziness or selfishness that could also breed future offenders who steal for profit. Others choose as thieves, instead of working hard to make an honest living. All situations should be judged following the legal system. Another case is that people do not have enough money to make ends meet, they will be tempted to purse illegal activities just to support themselves and their families. In this case, each crime individually should be considered to reducing punishment.
In conclusion, while a number of people think that each type of crime should be fixed punishment, I would argue that they should be judged taking both the circumstances and motivation account.