Hi Guys. Once again I will be needing you kind advice with this piece I made.Thanks.TASK:
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 commiting it,should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment.
Concerns about reviewing crimes and their corresponding penalties have been numerously raised in the civil society. Many stand to the theory that crimes should receive the same degree of punishment regardless of situation and intention. Both views of individuals in favor and against this theory will be discussed.
People in favor of equal punishment claimed that justice is best served when no considerations are taken in to account. Moreover, if crimes were viewed in a flat perspective, potential crimes would be reduced since individuals will be aware that the chances of being acquitted will be low. Thus, through equal punishment it is believed that society would be more safe and secure.
However, many are also against this theory. It is without a doubt that humans are gifted with wisdom for the purpose of seeking justice and truth. This is what separates humanity from computers: why would you judge a crime logically when you can do it rationally? A perfect example of this is euthanasia or otherwise called as mercy-killing. Logically, the act of killing a person itself is a crime. But the act of releasing a victim from his endless suffering is considered a good deed. Thus, the killer with a motive of helping does not deserve to receive the same amount of punishment as normal killers do.
In my opinion, it is more human to carefully review the circumstances of the violation being done. In addition, the type of punishment should be variable depending to the degree of crime.