There is ongoing debate on the topic whether the punishment should be fixed or tailored for offenders. Both perspectives have their own merit but I believe that punishment should be according to the circumstances.
Supporters of fixed punishment argue that standarised sentence promote fairness and consistency. When every offence has a predetermined penalty it lead to less bias and unequal treatment by judges. For instance, a mandatory sentences for theft ensures that the same punishment would face by every offender .It ensures the equal judicial system and give confidence to public.
However, opponent contend that this system fails to account the nuances of each case. Every crime has its own motivation , impact, reason and treating them identically lead to injustice. For example, if a person is caught in case of theft, may be it due to his starving family whom which he want to feed. So it shows that it should be judge in different ways as compare to other professional thiefs.
In my opinion . undoubtedly its right that fixed sentencing help to keep the consistency in the system but it is better to consider the circumstances behind the each offence. In this way, it ensures fairness in the judicial system.