It’s debated whether there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime, or people should take into account circumstances of an individual crime. In my opinion, it’s reasonable to take into consideration individual details of each offense.
On the one hand, people who support fixed punishments, believe that a person who commited a crime should be punished according to the law without any exceptions. Thus, determined punishments may warn people that illegal actions will be punished. Moreover, implementing fixed punishments can significantly reduce the corruption in the judicial system. So, when a judge carry out a sentence, it leaves no place for bribery, ensuring that influential and wealthy people cannot buy their freedom.
On the other hand, people should always take into account circumstances of an specific crime, because every case is different. The conditions of a crime and motives of the criminal can significantly affect final sentence, either greatly reduce or increase it. For instance, a man, who killed other person in order to protect himself, should not face the same punishment as a killer. Besides, judges should also consider factors such as earlier crime or offender’s age. Taking such details into account allows people to impose more fair and right sentence.
In conclusion, I think, making appropriate decision about people’s future lives is much more important than following strict rules. A system that obeys only fixed laws without looking at the circumstances may destroy lives of innocent people. So, I believe, that judges should take into account circumstances of an individual crime.