All crimes are by-products of the society wherein these crimes take place. So punishing offenders exclusively on the basis of evidences is against reason.

• How do you look at this argument?
• Do you think all crimes are by-products of the milieu?

Though crime and punishment are common in all societies, there are differing views on punishment. Some say, mere evidence is not enough to justify it. This argument sounds rather acceptable to me too because a great number of crimes are circumstantial.

My only argument favouring this idea is that there are willful crimes and crimes forced by circumstances. When it comes to circumstances, we cannot separate an offender from his or her milieu. For example, a man may be forced to do a crime out of the pressures exerted by his surroundings. It is out of self defense or pressure for existence, one may be forced to do a crime.

This act in legal parlance may be a crime. But as per human reason, it is an act that justifies one’s existence. Here a few mere evidences that somebody has seen him or her commit an act of crime does not justify punishment.

However, we cannot brand all crimes as by-products of the milieu. There are criminals who are chronic criminals. They are incorrigible and their life is a great threat to others. For example, there are many people who commit crimes to satisfy their personal criminal interests. They cannot be corrected and their primary aim is to make money or destroy others or something like that. We cannot call these criminals or their crimes by-products of the milieu.

Though all is said, we need to understand the fact that all crimes invite punishment. But when it is a matter of survival, justice system needs to look into the circumstances that went into the making of a criminal act.

265 words
ajaypeesdoc