It is thought by some that if all crimes had a fixed punishment, it would be more effective. Having a fixed punishment is advantageous as it could act as a deterrent and offer more equality, but there are also drawbacks to be taken into account.
On the one hand, there are some positive points of using a fixed sentence for all crimes. Firstly, it is a powerful deterrent for people as it informs them clearly about the cost of each criminal behaviour. In other words, it will give rules for the citizens. Rules are one of the key of education and prevention. Secondly, offenders can benefit from fixed punishment as it brings more equality. In some nations, sentences can be lightened by the defence attorney who can have some various strategy and ability to use hoopholes in the law. Consequently, by having a predefined sentence linked to a crime, there will not have any difference regardless of the level of knowledge of the defence attorney.
On the other hand, there are some downsides of having a fixed punishment for crimes. One clear negative point is that each situation is unique. A murder is obviously a person which has killed another person, but the circumstances might be differents in each individual case. Moreover, mental health problems, such as schizophrenia for example, can change a mindset for a moment leading to the possibility of heinous behaviour for a non violent person. Consequently, in this situation, having a fixed punishment would be unfair due to the mental trouble of the offender. Another disadvantage of fixed punishment is that it will undoubtedly lead to the disparition of trials due to the pre established sentences. Trials are a major part of any developed country as it protects individual rights.
In conclusion, while fixed punishement are advantageous in some points, they can lead to a lack of nuances by loosing the power of circumstances of any crime and the disparition of some basic human rights.