Some people have the point of view that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime. Nevertheless, another part of people assert that all aspects and factors should be taken into account when deciding on the punishment. I believe that circumstances should play a significant role in prison sentence. Discussing both sides, I will explain my personal opinion.
Some people support the idea of fixed punishments. The specific reason might be their desire to simplify everything in matters of. For instance, if somebody robbed bank, he would be sentenced to 15 years in prison, if it was a fixed punishment for this type of crime. Thus, police, lawyers and judges will just follow this legislation without accounting details of crime. Everything will be easier. However, people with another opinion will argue about it. The main reason might be their perception of punishments. They might think that before somebody will be punished, all significant factors of crime should be involved. We can not probably sentence to 35 years in prison a person for defending himself just because it is a fixed punishment for hurting somebody. Every aspect needs to be accounted.
I strongly agree with the second point of view. Give somebody a punishment is serious matter. Maybe, having fixed punishments would be much easier but when we talk about deciding someone’s fate, we can not even think about simplification. Murder is murder but it could have been unintentional or accidental murder. Crime is crime but it could have been crime under threat or forced to save someone. All these significant aspects should be accounted when deciding on somebody’s punishment.
In conclusion, all opinions have a place to be. Nonetheless, personally I assume that sentences should include all aspects and circumstances of each crime.