A Time to Kill
Twenty years ago Don Henley sang a song called “The End of the Innocence,” and portrayed a coming of age scenario. In Henley’s song, he sings the lines, “Offer up your best defense/ but this is the end/ this is the end of the innocence.” The disputable age-of-accountability permeates American society. In the essay, “Too Immature for the Death Penalty,” Paul Raeburn offers his defense into the chemical and environmental make-up of juveniles in their decision-making processes. However, the issue of personal accountability, or an end of innocence, is never brought up. Regardless of age, Americans cannot avoid decisions, because decisions determine destinies. Individuals choose either the path of wisdom or the path of folly, and no one can postpone or sidestep these choices. When does responsibility begin and accountability end? While juveniles’ brains may not be fully developed, juveniles must be held accountable for their actions. No matter what age group is involved, murder is still murder, and requires the death penalty to enforce the consequences of the crime.
Each day Americans make decisions that affect the outcomes of their lives. Some choices are easily made, while others require intense thought. The consequences of actions, nonetheless, are known from as early on as childhood. For example, a small child knows immediately that he or she can thrust their hand in a fire and feel the consequences. However, Mr. Raeburn states, “teenagers cannot be held fully responsible for their actions because all the wiring to allow adult decision making isn’t completed yet” (517). Still, teenagers can be held responsible for operating a vehicle, and be held accountable to obey traffic laws. These illustration...
... middle of paper ...
... just fear them. Besides having no other real options in supporting themselves, murderers would more than likely repeat the same crime if released.
Although the death penalty alone cannot bring back the life of those who have been murdered, it can serve as ultimate justice for the victims and their families. The deterrence of the death penalty can save lives. While opinions abound on both sides of the fence, in the use of the death penalty on juveniles, no one can argue with the fact that the voices of those murdered cannot be heard. Juveniles may not have fully developed brains, as Raeburn argues, but this is not an adequate excuse to dismiss the death penalty. American society cannot afford to babysit murderers, nor can they rehabilitate them. The end of the innocence begins when an innocent life is taken, and the sanctity of life is held defenseless.
Thus, the shifting perceptions of the justice system has transformed what it means to be a child and an adult due to their pervasive, and punitive approaches to crime and delinquency. Although adolescents today enjoy many new freedoms and greater time to experiment, those that don’t conform to “normative behaviors” and engage in socially constructed definitions of delinquency, often end up under the firm hands of the juvenile justice system. Despite the creation of this phase in an adolescent’s life, the injustices within the adult justice system have breached into the juvenile system, thus, blurring the lines of what it means to be an adolescent in modern times. Thereby, the adolescent stage is constantly being manipulated to conform and match the social construction of crime and delinquency, and the rise in the practice of trying juveniles as adults within the court system and mandating life sentences is evidence of this
If a family member was murdered, a family member was murdered, age should not dictate if the punishment for homicide will be more lenient or not. If anyone not just juveniles has the capabilities to take someone's life and does so knowing the repercussions, they should be convicted as an adult. In the case of Jennifer Bishop Jenkins who lost her sister, the husband and their unborn child, is a strong advocate of juveniles being sentenced to life without parole. In her article “Jennifer Bishop Jenkins On Punishment and Teen Killers” she shows the world the other side of the spectrum, how it is to be the victim of a juvenile in a changing society where people are fighting against life sentences for juveniles. As she states in the article “There are no words adequate to describe what this kind of traumatic loss does to a victims family. So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never
The sentencing of underage criminals has remained a logistical and moral issue in the world for a very long time. The issue is brought to our perspective in the documentary Making a Murderer and the audio podcast Serial. When trying to overcome this issue, we ask ourselves, “When should juveniles receive life sentences?” or “Should young inmates be housed with adults?” or “Was the Supreme Court right to make it illegal to sentence a minor to death?”. There are multiple answers to these questions, and it’s necessary to either take a moral or logical approach to the problem.
Day after day in this country there is a debate going on about the death penalty and whether we as people have the right to decide the fate of another persons life. When we examine this issue we usually consider those we are arguing about to be older men and women who are more than likely hardened criminals with rap sheets longer than the height we stand (Farley & Willwerth, 1998). They have made a career of crime, committing it rather than studying it, and somewhere along the line a jury of their peers decided enough was enough. They were handed down the most severe and most final punishment of them all, death. Behind all of the controversy that this issue raises lies a different group of people that are not so often brought into the lime light, juveniles.
Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is entirely eliminating the use of the life without parole sentence for juveniles, regardless of the nature of the crime being charged.
The death penalty, as administered by states based on their individual laws, is considered capital punishment, the purpose of which is to penalize criminals convicted of murder or other heinous crimes (Fabian). The death penalty issue has been the focus of much controversy in recent years, even though capital punishment has been a part of our country's history since the beginning. Crimes in colonial times, such as murder and theft of livestock were dealt with swiftly and decisively ("The Death Penalty..."). Criminals were hanged shortly after their trial, in public executions. This practice was then considered just punishment for those crimes. Recently though, the focus of the death penalty debate has been on moral and legal issues. The murderers of today's society can be assured of a much longer life even after conviction, with the constraints of the appeals process slowing the implementation of their death sentence. In most cases, the appeal process lasts several years, during which time criminals enjoy comfortable lives. They have television, gym facilities, and the leisure time to attend free college-level classes that most American citizens must struggle to afford. Foremost, these murderers have the luxury of time, something their victims ran out of the moment their paths crossed. It is time this country realized the only true justice for these criminals is in the form of the death penalty. The death penalty should be administered for particularly heinous crimes.
There are over sixty offenses in the United States of America that can be punishable by receiving the death penalty (What is..., 1). However, many individuals believe that the death penalty is an inadequate source of punishment for any crime no matter how severe it is. The fact remains, however, that the death penalty is one of the most ideal forms of punishment. There are other individuals who agree with the idea that capital punishment is the best form of punishment. In fact, some of these individuals believe that this should be the only form of punishment.
For decades, the contentious issue on whether or not juveniles should be tried as adults for heinous crimes has stirred up a gargantuan amount of disputation. However, juveniles are taken into account as “children” only under certain circumstances. When the situation comes to smoking, drinking, voting and watching rated-R movies, juveniles are merely children. However, when the circumstances are absolute, juries are so compelled to have children be tried as adults when juveniles commit severe crimes that courts go to the extent of sentencing juveniles to long-term punishments. Nonetheless, juveniles who are tried as adults arise significantly more problems than they had before, thus, juveniles should not be tried as adults in spite of that it causes so much controversy and is
In the article On Punishment and Teen Killers by Jenkins, sadly brings to our attention that kids are sometimes responsible for unimaginable crimes, in 1990 in a suburban Chicago neighborhood a teenager murdered a women, her husband, and her unborn child, as she begged for the life of her unborn child he shot her and later reported to a close friend that it was a “thrill kill”, that he just simply wanted to see what it felt like to shoot someone. A major recent issue being debated is whether or not we have the right to sentence Juveniles who commit heinous crimes to life in adult penitentiaries without parole. I strongly believe and agree with the law that states adolescents who commit these heinous crimes should be tried as adults and sentenced as adults, however I don’t believe they should be sentenced to life without parole. I chose this position because I believe that these young adults in no way should be excused for their actions and need to face the severe consequences of their actions. Although on the other hand I believe change is possible and that prison could be rehabilitating and that parole should be offered.
It is ironic that how some children are able to present themselves more mature than adults. The youth of the generation is becoming more mature and are developing adult skills faster than ever. People are beginning to wonder about the age of adulthood and how it should be determined. This controversy beleaguers around privileges such as drinking, driving, and voting. According to the article What is the Age of Responsibility by Alan Greenblatt, society determines that a person is an adult through customary rites, legal rights, and one’s responsibilities. However, I believe that the best way to adulthood is shown through one’s obligation for their priorities and work.
One of the most repetitive and controversial topics discussed in the criminal justice system, is the death penalty. Capital punishment has been a part of our nation’s history since the creation of our constitution. In fact, as of January 1st, 2016, 2,943 inmates were awaiting their fate on death row (Death Penalty Information Center). Throughout my life, I have always been a strong advocate for the death penalty. During the majority of my undergraduate degree, I was a fierce supporter of capital punishment when discussing the topic in classes. However, throughout many criminal justice courses, I found myself in the minority, regarding the abolishment of the death penalty. While debating this topic, I would always find myself sympathetic to the victims and their families, as one should be, wanting those who were responsible for heinous crimes to
While many argue that juveniles who commit serious crimes, such as murder, should be treated as adults, the fact is, juveniles under the age of eighteen, are not adults, and should not be treated as such. Juveniles are not mature enough or developed psychologically, and, therefore, do not consider the consequences of their actions. In the article, “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Thompson, the writer argues that juveniles are not adults. Their brains develop at different stages and they learn skills that they need to learn at a certain time.
Critics of minors being in charge of their decision argue that they do not have the ability to make complex decisions because they lack the
For instance, juveniles do not deserve life sentences because their brain isn’t fully developed yet and lack awareness of their actions. In the article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Paul Thompson, he explains the development of the brain and how in some situations the brain isn’t ready and it can affect the person. This effect in divergent ways; psychologically and emotionally. Thompson's article introduces the case of Nathaniel Brazill, at age 14, charged with second degree murder, trial as an adult and sentenced to life in prison without parole. After some serious research, it has shown that as many other juveniles who have committed a crime they are “far from adulthood”.
“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life. Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option, and an outdated method. The debate has experienced varying levels of attention over the years, but has always kept in the eye of the public. While many still advocate for the continued use of capital punishment, the process is not the most cost effective, efficient, consistent, or up-to-date means of punishment that America could be using today.