Some people believe that there should be fixed punishment 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.
Deciding on the punishment for each type of crime has been pros and cons. Some may argue that for fixing punishment, it should depend on individual crime and reason for doing that. While, I think this has possible reasons in both of views.
Firstly, as people quote, there are crimes when there is have chances, much of crimes have been appeared today and some argue punishment decided based on type of crime. For the illegal activity, we can mention corruption, for instance. This measure makes suffer of financial lost in some countries and makes their citizen live in poverty. Therefore, corruption is a crime which can infect many people to become corruptors. Then, corruption is a dangerous crime which there is not only government but also manager in some institutions can do it. Again, robberies, murders and rape cases are illegal activities so they should get heavy punishment because they found victims to do crimes. As such, crimes which make suffering other people reasonable to get heavy punishment depend on how they do their crime.
However on the other side of this argument that the reason why people doing crime affect to punishment what will they get. For example, kill somebody to defense ourselves. Much of crimes threat us wherever we are, when somebody tries to attack other people, they have to self defense like fight until they inadvertently kill the culprit. From that case, it will be injustice to person who had committed a crime for self defense because it can not be considered as crime as it was unintentionally done by the person. Moreover, before fixed the punishment, the judge have to looking for the reason and make it clear why people doing that. Thus this makes it clear why the argument that decided punishment depends on motivation for committing it.
In conclusion, government has a key role to arrange the punishment and create a rule which is fair for culprit based on their crimes. So, it makes the culprit do not repeatedly do their fault. Thus, deciding punishment fairly is really important to decrease the criminal in some countries.
I feel that the introduction doesn't really catch reader's attention. It's rather just a repetition of the question. And I guess you didn't have enough time to proofread because there are some careless mistakes. For example, "... each type of crime has been pros and cons". Did you forget to exclude "been"?
There are many crimes examples. If you could point out a specific example and analyse it a bit, it'd be good.