Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Consequences of youth crime
Consequences of youth crime
Consequences of youth crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Consequences of youth crime
According to Maya Cepeda (2016), congresmans wants to revert the age limit of imprisonment from 15 years old to 9 years old. Without lowering the age limit, youth offenders will continuously commit crimes knowing they can get away from it. And since minors cannot be imprisoned at an early age, the become the primary instruments of syndicates and gangs to commit and execute illegal transactions easily. Furthermore, crimes by the youths are not only seen through face to face actions but also through online.
Juvenile court is a special court that deals with under age defendants that are charged with crimes, who are neglected, or out of their parent’s control. The average age of the Defendants are younger than 18, but juvenile court doesn’t have jurisdiction in cases in which a minor is charged as an adult. The procedure of juvenile court is to involve parents or social workers and probation officers in order to achieve positive results and prevent minors from future crimes. However, serious crimes and repeated offenses can result in the juvenile offender being sentenced to a prison, with a transfer to a state prison when they reach adulthood. According to the film “Prison States”, Christel Tribble’s was a 15-year-old from Kentucky who was diagnosed
People have, not too long ago, realized that youth and adults are very diverse and should not be treated the same. They gave no time for children to develop the “meins reis”, therefore, they were not given the opportunity to learn. People were not aware that the brain of the youth were not fully developed and were not given the chance of change. They thought that once guilty you shall remain guilty. For that reason they were considered adults, when in reality, adult criminals will only continue to infatuate their mind with evil. The new Youth Criminal Justice Act focuses on change and reintegration with society. We have learned that the youth have not fully developed and do not have the full ability to comprehend such judgements.
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.
A report issued by Amnesty International in 1998, based on data from the Department of Justice and from individual states, estimates that as many as 200,000 youth under the age of eighteen, some as young as thirteen, are prosecuted in adult court annually. The action of sending children into the adult criminal justice system contrasts greatly with the traditional view that delinquent children need help to turn their lives around in order to succeed in their futures. Judges are said to refrain from giving the younger children harsh punishments, even if they commit the exact same crime as someone eighteen or older. Additionally, there are problems with trial by jury in regard to the juvenile cases; juries are just regular citizens and most of them tend to sympathize with kids who are being tried severely. Lastly, offenders who are tried in adult court before legally being considered adults will face many hardships when their release date comes, leading to likely failure to flourish in the rest of their lives. Transferring juveniles to criminal court puts unnecessary strain on the already fearful child and therefore if the offender is 18 or younger, they should stay in juvenile court to receive their sentence and become free citizen who can have a positive impact on their community and society as a whole.
There has always been controversies as to whether juvenile criminals should be tried as adults or not. Over the years more and more teenagers have been involved in committing crimes. In some cases the juries have been too rough on the teens. Trying teens as adults can have a both positive and negative views. For example, teens that are detained can provide information about other crimes, can have an impact in social conditions, and serve as experience; however, it can be negative because teens are still not mature enough for that experience, they are exposed to adult criminals; and they will lose out on getting an education.
Serious crimes such as murder, burglary and rape have raised questions as to whether the young offenders should face severe punitive treatment or the normal punitive measures in juvenile courts. Many would prefer the juveniles given harsh punishment in order to discourage other young people from engaging in similar activities and to serve as a lesson to these particular offenders. However, results from previous studies indicate such punitive measures were neither successful nor morally acceptable. Instead, the solutions achieved have unfairly treated the youths and compromised the society status (Kristin, page 1).
Juveniles deserve to be tried the same as adults when they commit certain crimes. The justice systems of America are becoming completely unjust and easy to break through. Juvenile courts haven’t always been known to the everyday person.
Much controversy exists on the question of whether a juvenile criminal should be punished to the same extent as an adult. Those who commit capitol crimes, including adolescents, should be penalized according to the law. Age should not be a factor in the case of serious crimes. Many people claim that the child did not know any better, or that he was brought up with the conception that this behavior is acceptable. Although there is some truth to these allegations, the reality of this social issue is far more complex. Therefore we ask the question, "Should childhood offenders of capitols crimes be treated as adults?"
A deep look into juveniles in adult prisons. Touch bases on several smaller issues that contribute to juveniles being in and effects of adult prisons. The United States Bureau of Prisons handles two hundred and thirty-nine juveniles and their average age is seventeen. Execution of juveniles, The United States is one of only six countries to execute juveniles. There are sixty-eight juveniles sitting on death row for crimes committed as juveniles. Forty-three of those inmates are minorities. People, who are too young to vote, drink alcohol, or drive are held to the same standard of responsibility as adults. In prisons, they argue that the juveniles become targets of older, more hardened criminals. Brian Stevenson, Director of the Alabama Capital Resource Center said, “We have totally given up in the idea of reform of rehabilitation for the very young. We are basically saying we will throw those kids away. Leading To Prison Juvenile Justice Bulletin Report shows that two-thirds of juveniles apprehended for violent offenses were released or put on probation. Only slightly more than one-third of youths charged with homicide was transferred to adult criminal court. Little more than one out of every one hundred New York youths arrested for muggings, beatings, rape and murder ended up in a correctional institution. Another report showed a delinquent boy has to be arrested on average thirteen times before the court will act more restrictive than probation. Laws began changing as early as 1978 in New York to try juveniles over 12 who commit violent crimes as adults did. However, even since the laws changed only twenty percent of serious offenders served any time. The decision of whether to waive a juven...
Guilty! As the gavel hits the sound block, everyone is amazed at the verdict. This teenage boy is sentenced to a life in prison without parole. As you read this in newspapers, magazines, and even online, what goes through your head? You may be thinking, “Why is this teen being tried as adult, he is just a kid?” While he is “just a kid”, and this is a widely held opinion, but it is not mine. Should minors who commit violent crimes be tried as adults? Absolutely. Just because minors are young they do have the ability to know what is right from wrong. Since these minors have committed the crime, they need to be held accountable. If a minor has acted as an adult, they need to be treated like adults. Lastly, minors need to know that their actions have consequences, no matter what age.
Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of the Canadian population ranging from 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of the Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principles of these laws have been debated for a long time.
Moreover, the juvenile gets more involved in crime which increase the arrest rate and then the Criminal Justice System also increase the penalty for teenagers. The “prohibitions on teenagers for purchasing or possessing weapons, the liquidation of the adolescent death punishment, and the age-targeted rules result in the hypot...
Hundreds of youth under the age of 16 are incarcerated at the Department of Juvenile Justice in New York City. The majority of these young people locked up do not pose a threat to society because they are convicted of non-violent, low-level offenses. If these are low-level offenses, why are these young individuals being sent to juvenile centers? Well, rather than employing traditional disciplinary measures for minor discretions such as detention or counseling, faculty members are instead using drastic methods such as suspension, expulsion and law enforcement to punish the youth. This funneling of students out of school and into the streets and the juvenile correction system is known as the “School-to-Prison-Pipeline.” This cycle deprives the youth who are in poverty, of meaningful opportunities such as an education and a future.
The United States has been affected by a number of crimes committed by juveniles. The juvenile crime rate has been increasing in recent years. Everyday more juveniles commit crimes for various reasons. They act as adults when they are not officially adults. There is a discussion about how juveniles should be punished if they commit heinous crimes. 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.
It is almost a daily occurrence to turn on the nightly news and hear stories of ever increasing youths committing crimes. Even more alarming are the ages of these offenders. In Lake Station, Indiana, three first-grade students were plotting to kill a classmate. They even went so far as to draw a map of where the slaying was to take place. In California a six year old boy was charged with attempted murder of a 3 month old baby. In Southern California, three 17 year old girls were charged with false imprisonment, conspiracy, aggravated mayhem and torture when they held a 15-year-old runa...