Van-Writing Task 2
Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 1:43 pm
Topic: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 account when deciding on the punishment.
Discuss both of these views and give own opinion.
Crimes in a society has been occurring globally since the dawn of time. Throughout history,the laws and punishments to such acts have been implemented by authorities and are continuously reviewing for a better justice for the victims where new laws are being enacted. It is discussed that specific penalty must be imposed to a certain crime, however, I firmly believe that due process must be considered where the motivation and circumstances of a crime must be reviewed. This argument will be proven by looking at how due process can be beneficial in seeking fair justice.
Foremost, every individual has the right to equal justice where one can accuse a perpetrator or defend himself in a court of law. For instance, a person accused of killing as an act of self-defense, where the intention was saving his self and the circumstance gave him no other choice. Clearly, following due process of law will provide substantial evidence to support the nature of the crime. This proves, that not all crimes committed are evil by nature if the motive and circumstances will be reviewed properly to determine the gravity of the crime.
In addition to this, though there is a saying that, " the means does not justify the ends"', this not necessarily means that it applies in all circumstances in a crime, where the precursor to an act of crime must also be taken into consideration. An instance illustrating this, is the prior example mentioned, killing as a form of self-defense. Because of this example a thorough review review of the cause of crime and the situation involved must be done in order to fortify any imposed penalty on the suspect.
To sum it up, due process should be accorded to anyone accused of a crime to determine his guilt or innocence, thus achieving justice fairly.
Discuss both of these views and give own opinion.
Crimes in a society has been occurring globally since the dawn of time. Throughout history,the laws and punishments to such acts have been implemented by authorities and are continuously reviewing for a better justice for the victims where new laws are being enacted. It is discussed that specific penalty must be imposed to a certain crime, however, I firmly believe that due process must be considered where the motivation and circumstances of a crime must be reviewed. This argument will be proven by looking at how due process can be beneficial in seeking fair justice.
Foremost, every individual has the right to equal justice where one can accuse a perpetrator or defend himself in a court of law. For instance, a person accused of killing as an act of self-defense, where the intention was saving his self and the circumstance gave him no other choice. Clearly, following due process of law will provide substantial evidence to support the nature of the crime. This proves, that not all crimes committed are evil by nature if the motive and circumstances will be reviewed properly to determine the gravity of the crime.
In addition to this, though there is a saying that, " the means does not justify the ends"', this not necessarily means that it applies in all circumstances in a crime, where the precursor to an act of crime must also be taken into consideration. An instance illustrating this, is the prior example mentioned, killing as a form of self-defense. Because of this example a thorough review review of the cause of crime and the situation involved must be done in order to fortify any imposed penalty on the suspect.
To sum it up, due process should be accorded to anyone accused of a crime to determine his guilt or innocence, thus achieving justice fairly.