IELTS task 2: Both views: fixed punishment for crime or case by case consideration

I appreciate all your comment on my essay below:

Topic: Some people believe that there should be fixed punishment for each type of crime. Others, however, argue that circumstances of an individual crime and the motivation for committing it should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment.

Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion

The level of flexibility in the judiciary has been a debatable topic for a long time. Should the same crime always be given the same punishment or should the judges consider how and why that crime is committed before making a decision?

On the one hand, advocates of fixed punishment argue that in order to make sure that everyone is treated equally by the law, people committing the same crime must receive the same sanction. In addition, stating clearly the penalty for each crime also avoids creating grey areas in the law that criminals can lean on to escape from paying their price.

On the other hand, other people think that the circumstance and motivation behind each crime must be taken into consideration when giving a sentence because these factors show the severity of each criminal case as well as the level of dangerous each criminal has to the society.

I personally agree with the second opinion. I think that it is inhuman to automatically sentence a person to a fixed punishment without considering the situation and reason behind his actions. A man committing murder for self-defense or to protect someone must be given a lighter sentence than a murderer for money. Underage criminals have not been mature yet so they must also be given a second chance to realize that they were wrong and grow up to be good people.

In conclusion, I support the opinion that the law should always take into account the motivation and circumstance of each individual crime to ensure that people who made mistake in the past can still lead a useful life in the future and contribute to the society. However, the legal system must be strict and specific enough so that it does not create any holes for criminals to take advantages of in order to avoid punishments.

Dear, @vuthuylinh2611
I think that your essay is properly written and answers the question.

Overall I think is a good essay. Grammar very good
On the second paragraph I would recommend you to add an example. Eg. despite the severity of the offense, every act of robbery should be sentenced with 3 days of imprisonment. Or better give an example regarding your explanation of grey areas....

the conclusion is clear but I suggest to paraphrase the introduction.

Hi. I have some suggestions for your essay =)))):

- I think it would be better if you write each paragraph with 3-5 sentences. Also, I suggest combining the 2 discussion paragraphs here into 1 single paragraph only. By doing so, your presentation would be much clearer and more concise.

- I like your discussion here, something I usually find difficult to present. However, I think you should use some connective devices to make it less troubling to be followed. And if you have used the pronoun "I", then the word "personally" would be redundant

- There is still something that is not sitting right with the fourth paragraph. I will paste it down here:

... and grow up to be good people.

You should replace "good" with other adjectives here. "Good" is general, it does not indicate much. It would be better if you substitute "good" with an adjective describing personality, such as "law-abiding".

I think that's all I want to comment here. In general, I really like your writing here. You have succeeded in doing something that I generally lack =)))))

Thank you all for your feedbacks. They really help me in improving my writing

Do not exaggerate the topic presentation in the paraphrase. You will lose points for not using proper translation terms for the keywords in the essay. In this case, the keyword was "Discussion". So the alternative words that could have been used are talks, opinions, conversation, dialogue, and discourse. Never use inflammatory descriptions in an essay response. The examiner will see the words and know that you are trying to impress him with vocabulary usage. However, instead of scoring up in the LR section, you will score down because you will be using a word that does not apply to the original keyword presentation. In the second paragraph, don't say "argue". A better replacement word would be "offer reasons" or "explain that". Again, no inflammatory word usage. It does not help the essay move upward in the scoring scale.

You did not appropriately deliver the restatement of the paragraph. Instead, you offered a question that does not relate to the original prompt. This is considered an alteration of the original prompt. Such an alteration, which became the focus of your response, will lead to a lower TA score as you show that you did not understand how the discussion topic is to be approached.

The TA section is a highly important part of the scoring. This is where your English comprehension skills are scored via your ability to explain a certain discussion using your own words, while still keeping the essence of the original presentation. Your essay failed to do this and as such, will receive a score that reflects your inability to properly restate a prompt. By posing a question instead of simply restating the facts, you have endangered more than half your total score.