The two types of people in society that have opinions on crime should have fixed punishment and another group of people thinks that the law should consider some circumstance. In this argument, arrange both side’s arguments.
On the one hand, fixed punishment gives a sense of clarity to criminals and bad elements in Society, which creates fear of murder or any kind of fraud in society. Having a clear idea of action people got aware of what the repercussion they are going to face if they did this kind of activity to humanity. Having fixed rules and regulations for a crime that helps people to study of law to become advocates, stable punishment is also gives symbol of equality in society.
On the other hand, fixed punishment has some loopholes in the criteria for example is soldier going through mental trauma and did a bad thing to society for that kind situation there should be a law on that he should not get the death punishment, making the option to send them to rehab centre for their treatment. In some cases, people murder the self-defence for this type of situation they should get some relief from justice.
In my opinion, the government should make a balance on this kind of sensitive thing so that no innocent get punished and make strong laws against criminals.
In conclusion, both perspectives are correct at some point but instead of giving relief to a particular person government should make laws on every kind of situation.