Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Issues of juvenile delinquency
Effects of juvenile crime
Juvenile life without parole
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Issues of juvenile delinquency
Adult Time For Adult Crime “Don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time.” -Sammy Davis Jr. Everyone is absolutely responsible for their actions. Although juveniles constantly use the excuse that they are just kids they are just as responsible for their mistakes. In particular, those teens who have committed serious crimes such as armed robbery or murder, are definitely accountable. Felonies are crucial, therefore if one has the capacity to commit such serious crimes then they definitely do not have the mindset of a child. Juveniles who commit intensive crimes as such should receive life without parole because they are responsible, dangerous, and unforgivable. Guilty teenagers should pay the price, even if that price is life without parole because they are responsible for their actions. For example, in the article “Kids Are Kids - Until They Commit Crimes”, by Marjie Lundstrom she mentions a case where “Lionel Tate-who was twelve when he savagely beat to death a six-year-old girl…” (Paragraph 11) A twelve-year-old boy definitely had bad intentions in hitting a girl half his age in the first place. To …show more content…
“My youngest sister was the joy of our close family. When a teenager murdered her and her husband…” (Paragraph 2) What this kid did is unforgivable because no matter what Jenkins’ sister can never be brought back to life. Jenkins has to live with the thought of her sister being murdered meanwhile people are arguing that he should have a chance to be freed. Jennifer Jenkins also says, “The juvenile death penalty was abolished here years ago and a life sentence still allows a great deal of good living to be done--even from behind bars--far more than these teen killers gave to our murdered loved ones.” (Paragraph 12) She makes a great point and I agree with her. There is no justification for murder because the damage is unfixable. People who kill are inexcusable regardless of
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.
Most people don 't look at every aspect of a crime. They don 't think about everyone that was affected, other than the victim. In her article "On Punishment and Teen Killers", Jennifer Jenkins explains how her younger sister was taken from her by a murderer who shot and killed her. In her article she states, "So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never recover." Jenkins is explaining her personal experience of losing her younger sister to help others understand what the families of the victim have to deal with for the rest of their lives. She brings a point of view that most people have never been in because they 've never experienced what it 's like to have a loved one taken away from you by murder. In her story she also states, "If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world." Many people believe that the supreme court needs to be more lenient on juveniles because their brain is not fully developed as that of an adult, but brain development cannot be used as an excuse because as Jenkins explains, the teens would be killing at the same rate all over the world. Jenkins also brings up a good point about how the US as a whole needs to step up to prevent these crimes from happening. Jenkins states, "We in America have to own to this particular problem, with weapons so easily available to our youth, and the violence-loving culture we raise them. She is trying to bring awareness to society that America is also at fault for these crimes. Furthermore, she also explains why life sentencing is not as cruel as some may feel it is when she says, "… a life sentencing still allows a great deal of good living to be done, even from behind bars, far more than these teen killers gave to our murdered love
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
Even though juveniles brains’ aren't developed at the age they committed the crime, they should be able to differentiate between what is right and what is wrong. However, four justices strongly agree, mandatory sentences reflected the will of America society that heinous crimes committed by juveniles should always be punished. The majority of Supreme Court justices who argued to abolish mandatory life in prison for juveniles. Researchers around the world agree with this statement because juveniles don't have a fully developed brain or have rough homes. Many juveniles have don't first degree misers and second degree murders. I stand against abolishing mandatory life in prison. In my opinion Juveniles, depending on the the crime should be sentenced
Heinous crimes are considered brutal and common among adults who commit these crimes, but among children with a young age, it is something that is now being counted for an adult trial and punishable with life sentencing. Although some people agree with this decision being made by judges, It is my foremost belief that juveniles don’t deserve to be given life sentencing without being given a chance at rehabilitation. If this goes on there’s no point in even having a juvenile system if children are not being rehabilitated and just being sent off to prison for the rest of their lives and having no chance getting an education or future. Gail Garinger’s article “ juveniles Don’t deserve Life sentence”, written March 14, 2012 and published by New york Times, mentions that “ Nationwide, 79 adolescents have been sentenced to die in prison-a sentence not imposed on children anywhere else in the world. These children were told that they could never change and that no one cared what became of them. They were denied access to education and rehabilitation programs and left without help or hope”. I myself know what it’s like to be in a situation like that, and i also know that people are capable of changing even children when they are young and still growing.
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.
The article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains”, by Paul Thompson, states “While research on brain-tissue loss can help us to understand teens better, it cannot be used to excuse their violent or homicidal behavior”. Thompson writes how even though teens cannot be understandable, they have a certain behavior that was caused by violent or harmful issues they've had at their young childhood. Another example would be in the article “Juveniles Don't Deserve Life Sentences”, by Gail Garinger, says “These children were told that they could never change and that no one cared what became of them”. This shows how these kids can have negative feelings about what they are told at a young age, leading to crimes. Every teen that has committed a crime has had a certain issue or negative way of growing
Sentencing juveniles to capital punishment is unethical and cruel. It is too severe for juveniles without the full reasoning ability and limited brain development to be sentence to the death penalty. Horn (2009) writes, “Youths lack the sense of responsibility that society requires of adults. Their personalities are not yet fixed… Young people have to little experience to fully grasp the consequences of their actions.” (Horn, 2009). This shows that juveniles do not have the experience that adults have to be like adults. Also, Stevenson (2014) writes, “Contemporary neurological, psychological…evidence has established that children are impaired by immature judgement, an underdeveloped capacity for self-regulation and responsibility, vulnerability to negative influences and outside pressures, and a lack of control over their own impulses and their environment.” (Stevenson, 2014, pg. 267-268). Stevenson (2014) is basically saying that children are not matured as adults and the court needs to look at these facts before giving such punishments. Not only that, Stevenson (2014) says, “Young adolescents lack life experience and background knowledge to inform their choices; they struggle to generate options and to imagine consequences; and, perhaps for good reason, they lack the necessary self-confidence to make reasoned judgements and stick by them” (Stevenson, 2014, pg. 268-269). Children should be
Age is a factor in why Juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison. As Paul Thompson states in his article Startling Finds on Teenage Brains from the Sacramento Bee, published on May 25, 2001 “ ...These frontal lobes,which inhibit our violent passions, rash action and regulate our emotions are vastly immature throughout the teenage years.” he also says that “The loss[of brain tissue] was like a wildfire, and you see it in every teenager.”. This loss of brain tissue plays a role in the erratic behavior of teens, they cannot properly assess their emotions and thoughts. During this period of brain tissue loss teens are unpredictable, adults do not know what their teen’s next move will be, teens themselves do not even know what their next move will be. As we grow our brains develop, therefore teen brains are not fully developed, so they cannot be held to the same standards as adults.
"Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time." -- David Grusin and Morgan Ames Much controversy exists on the question of whether a juvenile criminal should be punished to the same extent as an adult. Those who commit capital crimes, including adolescents, should be penalized according to the law. Age should not be a factor in the case of serious crimes.
once the minor has committed a violent crime, they are no longer a kid. The minor had the ability to know right from wrong, but he still chose to commit the heinous crime anyway. Choosing to commit this violent crime means that the minor chose to act as an adult and must be held accountable. Once the minor has made the decision to act as an adult, they must be treated as an adult. If we do not teach minors that what they did has consequences they will never learn. Arguments can be made that minors should not be treated as adults and while these arguments do have merit, they are not my beliefs. In my opinion, minors who commit violent crimes need to be tried as adults. Justice does not discriminate when it comes to age. Right is right, and wrong is wrong and the wrong should be punished equally.
That’s why we don’t permit 15-year-olds to drink, drive, vote or join the military” (qtd. in Billitteri). There is adolescent-development research according to Hambrick, J. and Ellem, J that has shown “children do not possess the same capacity as adults to think thru the consequences of their behaviors, control their responses or avoid peer pressure” (qtd. in Lyons). There are some very good points made in the argument against sentencing youth as adults but I still have a hard time agreeing with peer pressure or impulse control as a reason to be held in a juvenile center for less than a few years for murder. Ryan, L. uses the example of a report released by the Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention on “Juvenile Transfer Laws : An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency?” This report found that prosecuting youths as adults has little or no effect on juvenile crime.” She uses this information and backs it up with the report showing “youths prosecuted as adults are more likely to re-offend than youths handled in the juvenile justice system” (qtd. in Katel). This is definitely a new perspective, but I still stand with my first take on the subject. “We know young people can commit serious crimes, and the consequences are no less tragic” (qtd in
Their brains develop in different stages and they learn skills that they need to learn at certain time. In the article “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences”, by Garinger, she argues that juveniles should not be treated as adults if they commit horrible crimes. Garinger states that juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison without parole. She states that the court is considering life in prison without parole for juveniles who commit capital crimes. Garinger says that juveniles are immature, and still developing, so they can not be held to the same standards as adults. The writer add that as a juvenile court judge, she has seen how that juveniles can change and may become rehabilitated. For example, the court has already struck down death penalty and the life in prison without parole for juveniles or for young offenders convicted of non-homicide. According to the article, “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life In Prison,” Paul Garinger states that “Brain imaging studies reveal that the regions of the adolescent brain are responsible for controlling thoughts, actions, and emotions are not fully developed. They can not be held to the same standards when they commit terrible crimes.” If this is true, there is no a reason to treat juveniles as
Juvenile offenders should not be tried as adults because there are differences between a teenager and adult. A teenager is not mature as an adult. Some teenagers are capable to change their behavior and are capable to recognize their own mistakes. It is a huge mistake for juveniles offenders to be tried as adults and send them to adult court and prison . There are many factors why they should not be tried as adult.
The first article; “Adult Crime; Adult Time.” by Linda J. Collier is about how the juvenile delinquents of the world should be thrown right in with the hardened criminals. She talks about the Jonesboro, Arkansas incident in which 11-year-old Andrew Golden and 13-year-old Mitchell Johnson, slaughtered their classmates as they ran from the school building. They pulled the fire alarm and began their assault with a barrage of bullets. In this particular situation, “they are still regarded by the law as children first and criminals second.”(Pg. 620). This has not been the first time that young children have committed such crimes, but the average of violence committed by children has risen by 60% since 1984. She claims that because of these statistics, we need to update the juvenile justice system. “In recent years many states have enacted changes in their juvenile crime laws and some have lowered the age at which a juvenile can be tried as an adult for certain violent crimes.” (Pg. 620) According to this author, she feels that it is a start in the right direction. She claims that she has represented children as a court appointed guardian and is humbled trying to help children out of their difficulties which often due to circumstances beyond their control. Still, for violent crimes, she feels that “children who knowingly engage in adult conduct and crimes should automatically be subject to adult rules and adult prison time.”