There is a controversial perspective heating a debate over how retribution should be set to crimes. While some people think that it is crucial to take into consideration the reasons and situation in which a person was stimulated to perform a crime, others believe the punishment should be standard for all types of crimes, regardless of the other factors. To my mind, justice can not ignore some main causes behind the crime.
To begin with, people may sometimes commit illegal acts unintentionally. Crimes due to mental illnesses can be a great example of this situation. The worst is that neither society nor individuals would be aware of these conditions. Additionally, there might be situations in which people need to defend themselves. Meaning that individuals may commit murder in self-defense.
On the contrary, others argue that penalties should be standard for all crimes. This is because, when penalties are fixed, the public would be aware of the fact that they can not get away with retribution if they commit an unlawful action, even for drinking alcohol or driving fast. It is believed that this implementation will lead to thinking twice before doing illegal acts.
In conclusion, although it is important to take into account external circumstances and emotions in executing penalties, it should be done in a balanced way in which individuals are not easily stimulated to commit a crime, knowing that they can not escape from the punishment.