Law is based on the belief that justace can be maintained through pulishments.

T he issue about how publishments are mapped with crime sparks bitter controversy among society. Some argue that puishments needed to be fixed for different kinds of crime, while some believe that, according to different circumstances, the mo tivation behind the crime should be considered in the court. This essay will dis cuss both sides. Obviously, the enforcement of law should be carried out in the most fair way. Th e reason for commiting crime cannot be justified, regardless to the identity as well as the social standard which the criminal enjoyed. The best way to accompli sh of this goal is to set up a fixed pulishment system. Plenty of evidence exist in those countries where legal system is not fully developed, those upper class citizens can aviod to be put behind the bar after breaking the law by paying a large sums of money. However, some people believe that the motivation should also be consider when cr imals are sentenced. They broke the law with no motivation to harm others or to gain benefit from it, whether it is for saving life or helping those families i n needed, the judge should consider before making decisions. What they requested is not justified whatever they did, rather the judge may give a second chance t o those offender. Society nowadays relies on the judgement of jury, hopefully they can be fair and objective during the trial. It is an almost impossible task to set a fixed puli shment for each type of crimes, from packpocketing to murder. Too often, people are somehow forced to cross the line and those people, if they are not for their own propose, should be given another chance to live a better life. In summary, whether the criminal is convicted or not, depends on the judgement o f the jury. This method is not totally subjective, it is being used for hundreds of years. The story behind each cases should be considered and therefore, setti ng a fixed pulishments for crimes is not the way we can ensure fairness.