There are more rational reasons why adolescents should be sent to their own private penitentiary. Even an eleven year old being able to be tried as an adult for murder. Otherwise, they will not understand the lesson. Juvenile courts were designed to provide not only rehabilitative functions but also protective supervision for youth. The United States was the only country, prior to the ruling that did not have such a law. Juveniles in adult court also recidivated sooner and more frequently. This will follow them all through out life, especially when trying to get a decent job.
Most kids who get involved in murders know exactly what they are doing. Topics: , , , , When minors commit violent crimes, should they be treated differently from adults? In the end a crime is a crime, no matter age or seriousness of the crime. More effective solutions should be explored and put to use, but juveniles should not be tried as adults. Juveniles in adult court often do not have the opportunity to acquire critical skills, competencies, and experiences that are crucial to their success as adults; rather, they are subject to an environment in which adult criminals become their teachers. Also punishing teens will reduce crime rates in the future because these teens will potentially commit more crimes as an adult.
Imagine what would become of these young individuals when mixed with adult prisoners with horrific criminal records. There are many crime prevention programs around the country that have been very successful in helping to reduce juvenile crime. The presence of gangs and illegal drug markets provides exposure to violence, negative role models, and possible rewards for youthful involvement in violent criminal activities. This is a very dangerous situation, especially if they are very young. When he tried to leave the man put a gun to his head and instructed him to rob the gas station for him. On one end are those who believe that punishing juvenile offenders in the same way as adult offenders will benefit the criminal justice system and on the other end are those who believe that juvenile offenders should not be tried Read More.
One, their educational and employment prospects become significantly worse, thus giving them incentive and opportunity to commit crimes, and two, the stigma that they face might lead to an inability to adjust in society and may cause for repeated criminal behavior. The Right to a Trial By Jury The juvenile courts do not have a jury, and offenders are not given a proper trial. Trying Juveniles as Adults, supra. It is believed that when children as young as 10-12 years of age commit a crime, they do not necessarily grow up to become criminals; yet when they are punished in the same manner as adults, the odds of this could somehow change. It is not about the death penalty, but they should be tried and get the same punishments as grown-ups. Many believe that this is the wrong approach to take up as it does not focus on the main factor at hand - the crime that has been committed. Many of these points, we are aware, are in direct opposition of each other, and yet, each of these issues is worth considering and argued upon.
In the end a crime is a crime, no matter how old you are or how serious the crime is. Hence, the emergence and increasing significance of the dilemma of whether juvenile offenders be tried and punish as adults. This is a very high number because teenagers have full control over their thoughts and actions. But what jail specifically you might ask? Since it has been established that children make rational decisions, it would not be wrong to suggest that if children are awarded with severe punishments for their crimes, they would consider the cost of committing a crime while making a decision regarding whether or not to indulge in deviant acts. He was attacked and held at gunpoint until the cops got there. Being caught sneaking out as a sophomore my parents brought strict and heavy consequences upon me.
If the teen was stupid enough to do the crime they can do the time. Alonza was only fifteen at the time so you would think he would go to a juvenile prison, but that was surely not the case. In order to better understand the passion behind this debate it is best to gain some insight from both sides of the fight. They will make smarter choices and hopefully not want to return to the lifestyle In conclusion I feel that by not trying juveniles as adults it is a better outcome for the child and society. There are several reasons for why this happens.
Well should teens who commit a serious crime be charged as adults? Giving community service as a punishment for murder just encourages the children to continue treading down the same path and unless we are willing to punish them properly, we might as well just hand a gun in their hand and ask them to do what they want. In doing so, this now leads us to choose the argument which is more acceptable and in accordance with the above-cited concerns. Putting juveniles in prison with adults does not deter crime. Violent or abusive conditions in juvenile justice systems have been documented in 22 states and Washington D. Simmons, the court abolished capital punishment for crimes committed by juveniles.
Many may argue that by the age of ten children know what they are doing, enough to know the consequences…. The stranger fed him and kept him in his house. Early childhood education is a ton of small pieces that makes up one beautiful picture. Sentencing kids to a life long prison term basically kills all of their hopes and dreams because of one mistake in their life. I believe yes, but it always should depend on the crime. If you need a similar, but unique essay, you can either do it by yourself or order from a.
We all make them, right? It has been observed that teens tried as adults tend to commit more crimes when released. Such difference particularly refers to ability to stand trial. If rehabilitation is the goal for teenagers who are tried and sentenced as adults, then prison is not the answer. One of the most controversial being whether to try juveniles as adults or not. This led to overcrowding which prompted redesigning. A part of me feels like he should not have gotten 13 years because he was a first time offender, but they the logical and real part, thinks he should because it was a serious crime he committed and could have furthered that if he would have shot.