Some people believe that there should be a 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.

Some people believe that having a fixed punishment for each kind of crime is a good idea. However, i would argue that the penalty should be decided by considering the circumstance and motivation of the offence.

There are several good reasons why fixed punishments should be applied. Firstly, this is clear and easy for the authority to implement. When each crime has its own penalty there is no lawyers needed and no discussion nor arguments on the crime. Secondly, not only would this help reduce the burden on the judge and the authority system, it would also deter the criminal from committing offence by showing them the clear and fixed "price" which they have to pay if they decide to offend.

However, I believe that judging the criminal based on the circumstances and their motivation when committing the crime would make our society a more humane system. This would help define good moral criminals, who are able to come back the society and continue to benefit it, among bad ones. For example, it would be a big difference between the one who killed someone in order to protect others and the want who had a clear motivation to offend. Besides, taking circumstances and motivation into account would help the judge make the best decision. By examining carefully all these factors they might find the determining elements to decide the right punishment for offenders.

In conclusion, even though, having a certain set of punishment for each crime may have some benefits i still believe that we should consider other factors like circumstances and motivation when deciding the final penalty.

Leonard