Some people believe that there should be fixed punishment for each type of crime. Others, however, argue that the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment. Discuss both these views and give your opinion
It is commonly believed that laws should provide unchanging punishment for any crime, according to this opinion judges have the task to apply the punishment provided by a law previously. Someone else disagrees and says that a judge should evaluate a lot of elements before he decides to punish an hypothetical criminal, it is vital to care about the conditions under which the crime was committed.
To start, Earlier Jurists agree with the first point of view, indeed they declare that a crime could be punished only according to a previous law that already established it. This implies that a lawgiver issues a punishment for a specific crime and the judge has only the task to apply the law and punish the criminal. He does not study the case deepthly or discover circumstances about the trial.
Other people oppose the last opinion, because they believe more in equity than in law. From their point of view, a case consists of a lot of factors. A significant example is the following: people who are affected by mental health problems have a right to a lower punishment.
To conclude, it is hard to share totally one of these two opinions because this debate is related to the justice issue. In this regard, two righs should be taken into consideration: from one hand the individual right for a fair punishment, from the other hand the right of society to keep away criminals. Only if it judges are able to balance the two rights, it will possible to build a counscious society
PLEASE, tell me what do u think about my writing...thanks
Re: PLEASE, tell me what do u think about my writing...thank
flor92 wrote:Some people believe that there should be fixed punishment for each type of crime. Others, however, argue that the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment. Discuss both these views and give your opinion
It is commonly believed that laws should provide unchanging punishment for any crime. according to this opinion judges have the task to apply the punishment provided by a law previously.(<--Reword to: "This means judges are tasked with applying the same punishment for a crime regardless of circumstances.") Others disagree and say that a judge should evaluate the elements before he decides to punish a criminal it is vital to care about the conditions under which the crime was committed. (<--Reword to: "These people believe that it is vital to consider the conditions under which the crime was committed before deciding on an appropriate punishment.")
To start, Earlier Jurists agree with the first point of view, indeed they declare that a crime could be punished only according to a previous law that already established it.(<--Reword to: "In the past, many jurists agreed with the point of view that crime should be consistently punished according to established law.") This implies that a lawgiver issues a punishment for a specific crime and the judge has only the task to apply the law and punish the criminal.(<--Reword to: "This implies that a punishment is decided on for each crime, and a judge's task is simply to apply that punishment.") He does not study the case deeply or discover circumstances around the crime.
Other people oppose this opinion, because they believe more in equity than in law. From their point of view, a case consists of a lot of factors. A significant example is the following: people who are affected by mental health problems have a right to a less severe punishment.
To conclude, it is hard to totally support either of these two opinions because this debate is related to justice. In this regard, two rights should be taken into consideration: on one hand the individual right for fair punishment, on the other hand the right of society to punish criminals. If judges are able to balance the two rights, it will be possible to build a conscious society.