33. 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 committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on punishment.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Sample Answer 1

Band 8.5

The intricate relationship between a nation's progress and the effectiveness of its criminal justice system has positioned the issue of crime at the forefront of global concerns. The debate on whether distinct penalties for specific crimes are indispensable continues, with compelling arguments on both sides, shaping the trajectory of legal frameworks worldwide.

Implementing different penalties for each offense brings forth several advantages that contribute to the overall well-being of a society. A significant merit lies in the deterrence effect, where the fear of multifaceted repercussions discourages individuals, particularly the youth, from engaging in criminal activities. This heightened awareness of personal responsibilities is vital for the sustained growth of a country's infrastructure. Additionally, varied penalties can play a crucial role in the resolution of social conflicts. Crimes such as robbery or theft have the potential to disrupt the peace and harmony of a nation, and specific penalties tailored to these offenses may act as a deterrent, mitigating the occurrence of such disruptive acts.

However, the implementation of a multitude of penalties is not without its drawbacks. The introduction of new laws and regulations demands legal professionals to familiarize themselves with a diverse range of concepts, a task that can be arduous and time-consuming. Simplifying the legal framework by imposing uniform penalties could alleviate the stress associated with learning new processes, fostering a higher level of engagement and efficiency within the legal profession.

In conclusion, I am inclined to believe that establishing distinct penalties for different offenses stands as one of the most effective methods to foster social growth in a society. This approach has contributed to the increasing acceptance of tailored penalties for specific types of crimes, striking a balance between deterrence and justice. As societies evolve, so too should their legal frameworks, adapting to the nuanced challenges posed by criminal activities in the contemporary world.

Difficult Words/Phrases with Example Sentences:

Intricate (adjective): Complex and detailed. 

Example: The intricate relationship between justice and progress is key.

Indispensable (adjective): Absolutely necessary.

 Example: Some argue distinct penalties are indispensable.

Trajectory (noun): The course or path that something takes. 

Example: This debate shapes the trajectory of legal frameworks.

Multifaceted (adjective): Having many different aspects or features. 

Example: Varied penalties have multifaceted repercussions.

Deterrence (noun): The act of discouraging someone from doing something by threatening them with punishment. 

Example: Penalties aim for deterrence of criminal activity.

Crucial (adjective): Extremely important; essential.

 Example: Social conflict resolution is crucial for societal well-being.

Mitigate (verb): To make something less severe or serious. 

Example: Penalties can mitigate disruptive acts.

Drawbacks (noun): Disadvantages or negative aspects. 

Example: Complex laws have their drawbacks.

Arduous (adjective): Difficult and tiring. 

Example: Learning new laws can be arduous.

Nuanced (adjective): Showing subtle differences or shades of meaning. 

Example: Penalties should adapt to nuanced challenges.

33. 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 committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on punishment.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Sample Answer 2

Band 8.5

 Whether punishments for crimes should be fixed or should take individual circumstances and motivations into account is a subject of ongoing debate. Others stress the importance of considering the context and motivations behind criminal acts, while some argue for fixed punishments for each category of crime. A balanced approach that incorporates both elements is required for an equitable and effective justice system, in my opinion.

        Fixed punishments, according to proponents, provide clarity, consistency, and deterrence. By establishing clear guidelines for punishments, the legal system ensures that similar offences receive equivalent punishments, regardless of the specifics of each case. In the minds of the law, this promotes justice and equality. In addition, the certainty of punishment serves as a deterrent, discouraging potential offenders from engaging in criminal behaviour.

On the other hand, proponents of individual circumstances believe that each case's punishment should be tailored to its particular circumstances. They contend that a one-size-fits-all approach fails to address the causes and motivations underlying illicit behaviour. To ensure a just and proportionate response, factors such as the offender's background, intent, and criminal history should be considered. This approach allows for the prospect of rehabilitation and reintegration into society, especially for offenders who demonstrate genuine remorse or who committed crimes due to mitigating circumstances.

           A balanced approach is essential, in my opinion. While fixed penalties provide clarity and consistency, it is essential to take into account the unique circumstances and motivations behind each offence. This can be accomplished through the discretion of judges, who have the knowledge and experience to evaluate relevant factors and determine appropriate punishments. In addition, rehabilitation programmes and community service can be incorporated into the justice system to address the underlying causes of criminal behaviour.

      In conclusion, a balanced approach is required to address the issue of fixed punishments versus individual circumstances in the justice system. While fixed punishments promote equity and deterrence, the context and motives behind crimes must also be considered to ensure proportionate responses and the possibility of rehabilitation.

Difficult Words/Phrases with Example Sentences:

Subject of ongoing debate: Something people have been arguing about for a long time. 

Example: The use of fixed vs. individual punishments is a subject of ongoing debate.

Stress (verb): To emphasize or highlight something. 

Example: Some stress the importance of considering context and motivations.

Equitable (adjective): Fair and just. 

Example: A balanced approach is needed for an equitable justice system.

Proponents (noun): People who support a particular idea. 

Example: Proponents of fixed punishments value clarity and deterrence.

Deterrence (noun): The act of discouraging someone from doing something by threatening them with punishment. 

Example: Fixed punishments aim for deterrence of criminal behavior.

One-size-fits-all approach: An approach that doesn't consider individual differences. 

Example: Individual circumstances argue against a one-size-fits-all approach.

Mitigating circumstances: Factors that make a crime less serious. 

Example: Remorse or difficult situations can be mitigating circumstances.

Discretion (noun): The ability to make one's own choices. 

Example: Judges use their discretion to consider individual circumstances.

Proportionate (adjective): Fair and reasonable in relation to the crime committed. 

Example: Punishments should be proportionate to the offense.

33. 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 committing it, should always be taken into account when deciding on punishment.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Sample Answer 3

Band 8

There is no denying the critical role criminal punishment plays in the growth and development of a nation, as crime continues to be a controversial global issue. The debate surrounding the necessity of fixed punishments for each type of crime remains a topic of considerable contention, with strong arguments both in support and against.

The allocation of distinct punishments for various offenses presents several compelling benefits that warrant consideration. Notably, the fear of detention serves as a potent deterrent, instilling awareness of the severe consequences awaiting potential wrongdoers. This heightened awareness is instrumental in fostering a sense of duty and responsibility among citizens, ultimately contributing to the overall development of the nation. Furthermore, tailored punishments have the potential to mitigate societal disputes, particularly in the context of crimes such as robbery or theft. Such punitive measures play a crucial role in preserving a nation's harmony and peace.

However, the advantages of varied punishments come with their set of drawbacks. The introduction of new rules and regulations requires legal professionals, including lawyers and judges, to grapple with a multitude of suggestions and opinions, presenting a formidable challenge. Conversely, a fixed punishment system can alleviate the burden on legal practitioners, sparking increased interest in their profession due to the absence of a constant need to adapt to new procedures.

In summary, I firmly believe that the adoption of multiple punishments for different crimes stands as one of the most effective ways to advance society. This approach, increasingly popular, underscores the need for a nuanced response to different offenses, contributing to a balanced and progressive legal system that aligns with the complexities of the modern world.