Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime. Others, however, argue that the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for commiting it, should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment.
One of the highly controversial issues today relates to whether to use standardised penalties or flexible ones. This essay examines this question from both points of view and then I will give my own perspective on the matter.
On one side of the argument there are people who argue that the benefits of standardised punishments considerably outweigh its disadvantages. The main reason for believing this is that it is more efficient and cheaper to manage. One good illustration of this is parking tickets. If every one of these had to go to court and be ruled upon by a judge and jury this would be very expensive and waste a lot of people’s time. It is also possible to say that this system is fairer because every person is treated the same regardless of race or gender.
On the other hand, it is also possible to make the opposing case. It is often argued that in fact it is better to consider the situation and reason of a crime. People often have this opinion because sometimes people are forced to commit a crime such as murder due to reasons like self-defence. Clearly, this should be considered in sentencing for the crime. A second point is that the reason for a crime should be taken into account. A particularly good example here is that someone who steals food to feed their family shouldn’t be punished as someone who steals a watch because they want to look wealthy.
In conclusion, I believe both arguments have their merits. On balance, however, I tend to feel that it is better to decide the penalty on a case-by-case basis, as getting the right decision is more important than the justice system saving money.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-20 | Ahmad_off | 61 | view |
| 2023-07-25 | minhanhtran2112 | 73 | view |
| 2023-04-24 | Aung | 78 | view |
| 2022-10-12 | namanpluck | 84 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | ulzzang | view |
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004 78
- Some people believe that there should be fixed punishments for each type of crime Others however argue that the circumstances of an individual crime and the motivation for commiting it should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, second, so, then, in conclusion, in fact, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1353.0 1615.20841683 84% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.69791666667 5.12529762239 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69578422804 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.572916666667 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 440.1 506.74238477 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0849526388 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.2 106.682146367 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249378820352 0.244688304435 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.086824193307 0.084324248473 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108873340138 0.0667982634062 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117311957449 0.151304729494 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.124742786832 0.056905535591 219% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.0946893788 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 50.2224549098 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.98 12.4159519038 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 78.4519038076 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.