Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime Other however argue that the circumstances of an individual crime and the motivation for commmitting it should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment D

Some people believe that each type of crime shoud have fixed punishment
but other people agree that the punishments have to base on the specific
situation. In my point of view, I inclined with the latter opinion which suggest
committing with the motivation and the circumstrances.

In the first point, there still exist fixed punishment for some crimes, like
death penalty for drug trafficking,.. This penalty will protect human rights and
also warn the criminal from committing a crime because the more harsd
punishment the more safety and security in social. Law is made for protecting
the innocent people and punish the wrongdoer but if apply the permanent for
each type of crime, it will remount the fundamental object.

In the latter view, they argue that shoukd always be taken into account
when deciding on punishment and I agree with this opinion. In multiple case, the
killer might be the victim since self – defence or robbery for feeding their
family. In this situation, the judge is the person who decide the best penalty base
on the condition of crime. But there also have bad sides for loose punishment
like increse the level of criminal. For example, in Korea, they have really bad
penalty for pendophilia which issue the high dangerous level of rape in this
country.

Summed up, even thought fixed punishment like life imprisonment or
death penalty can be beneficial for decrease of crime but the justice system have
to be more flexible and show the open – hand of law but still enough to dissuade
the citizen.