Teens know when they are committing a crime and doing something wrong. It has nothing to do with their parents, unless the parents are encouraging or taking part in the crime. Then, and only then, parents can be held responsible. It is rarely the parent’s fault, even if they do teach their children right from wrong. Morally, it's understandable for a parent to be held responsible. However, it’s no secret that teens break the law, thinking they’re basically invincible. They engage in underage drinking, vandalism, also possession, and under the influence of drugs. The answer is different depending on a number of factors. First, it depends on whether the child is being prosecuted for breaking a criminal law or sued for something civilly. In the …show more content…
Some young people commit much bigger crimes such as breaking and entering into a house, grand theft auto, even murder, and rape. Children of all ages are capable of breaking the law, but it can be speculated that adolescents tend to break the law more. Unfortunately, teens engage in risky behavior in their and high school years. Also, these crimes have severe consequences that last a lifetime. While these teens are seen as children simply making mistakes, they are still rational, mostly reasonable human beings who knowing exactly what they are doing. So, therefore, their crimes should not make their parents responsible (Emily Green). Furthermore parents cannot be responsible, because any person of sound mind is a rational being. Many people attempt to commit a crime because they think they can get away with it. The same goes for teens committing a crime, they do it, most of the time because they believe they'll get away with it. This is no reflection of one’s upbringing, only the way that person views right from wrong. Even if the children are diagnosed as mental, or crazy, it’s still not the parent’s fault, being that the parent was not supportive of the act (Stanton
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
The article titled “ Juvenile Justice from Both Sides of the Bench”, published by PBS, and written by Janet Tobias and Michael Martin informs readers on numerous judges’ opinions on the juveniles being tried as adults. Judge Thomas Edwards believed that juveniles should not be tried as adults because they are still not mature enough to see the consequences of their actions and have a chance to minimize this behavior through rehabilitation programs. Judge LaDoris Cordell argues that although we shouldn’t give up on juveniles and instead help them be a part of society, however, she believes that some sophisticated teens that create horrible crimes should be tried as adults. Bridgett Jones claims that teens think differently than adults and still
Over the years many violent crimes have been committed more by teenagers. The more serious crime the teenager did with psychology recommends that juveniles aren’t full responsible for what happen. In Anna Quindlen’s essay, The C Word in the Hallway, is about psychological autopsy with many peoples examples and how if health insurances provided coverage, then not many teens would have committed crimes. In Charlie Spence’s essay, Sixteen, talked about his locked up experience. There are crimes that aren’t that bad, but if a crime was committed so badly then the perpetrators should be locked away and be trialed as an adult.
According to web sources, most of the teens get cognitively developed between the ages of 13 to 17 years. In this period they attain maturity, that is they start getting the ability to make decisions based on the knowledge they attain. At this age, they also start building relationships with friends and family. I prefer that the age of responsibility should be increased from 10 years, at this age a child is still not mentally matured of the act he or she is doing. An article was also published in the newspaper ‘The Guardian’ dated 5.12.2012, with headline as ‘Age of criminal responsibility must be to protect children rights’.
There are many crimes committed by teenagers every year. Crimes that are committed by teens each year are mainly assault, bullying, gang violence, and physical fights. According to National Youth Violence Prevention Resource Center, about 1 and 9 murders are from kids that are under 18 (Center, 2001). In 1998, there were approximately 2,570 among youth aged 10-19. Every day there are at least 7 children murdered in the United States (Center, 2001). Statistics say that between 16%-32% female teenagers have committed a crime before the age of 17. Also 30%-40% male teenagers have committed a violent crime before they turned 17 (Center, 2001). Teenagers that commit crimes are the ones who were abused or bullied as a...
In today's society, personal responsibilities are held accountable only through explicit knowledge of an action's consequences. Without consequences, no individual can be held liable for his or her actions. As teenagers commit increasingly egregious crimes, the media shifts attention away from the actions of these teenagers and focuses on the seemingly severe punishments they are entitled to. Teenagers accused of violent crimes should be tried and sentenced justly, regardless of age, to ensure the law's equality before its citizens, to educate juveniles regarding the potential severity of their actions' consequences, and to prevent future acts of offense from occurring in society.
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While California's juvenile population rose by a half a million since the middle and late 1970's, juveniles made up less than fifth-teen percent of California's felony arrests in 1998, compared to thirty percent in 1978; according to the Justice Policy Institute. The juvenile arrests have dropped back, even as the population of kids between ages of ten and eight-teen has continued to grow, and the number of kids confined in the California Youth Authority (CYA) has fallen. With all the progress our society has made in cutting back in juvenile crimes there is still a very serious problem. But if locking kids up is the best way to address it, how do we explain a drop in crime when there are more teens in California and fewer in custody? First we must look at the economy around us. With so many job opportunities available more and more teenagers find honest ways to keep busy and make money. Our generation has a brighter future than the generation a decade ago. Next we look at successful crime prevention efforts: after-school programs, mentoring, teen outreach programs, truancy abatement, anti-gang programs, family resource centers. There is evidence that these programs are beginning to pay off. Sending more, and younger teens through the adult court system has been a trend across the country in reaction to crimes, such as school shootings and violent rapes. Yet evidence shows that treating youth as adults does not reduce crime. In Florida, where probability wise more kids are tried as adults then in any other state, studies found that youth sent through the adult court system are twice as likely to commit more crimes when they're release...
As minors commit violent crimes without being held accountable, they can grow up to be real criminals and they can be very dangerous. Without a solid foundation of what is right and wrong, these minors will grow up believing that their actions are the norm. For this reason, minors need to be held accountable. They need to be taught that they cannot get away with their crimes. In 2007, courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled an estimated 1.7 million delinquency cases. Delinquency cases include vandalism, shoplifting, robbery, and murder. These are just some of the crimes minors can commit. This was up by forty-four percent from 1985. If a minor grows up believing that crime is acceptable, they will repeat the pattern. Without interrupting the pattern and making them accountable, these minors will always have a twisted sense of right and wrong. A sense of what is right and wrong is important and can be learned at any age. Minors learn very young, what...
It is expected that at a young age, children are taught the difference between what is right and what is wrong in all types of situations. The majority of Supreme Court Justices abolished mandatory life in prison for juveniles that commit heinous crimes, argued this with the consideration of age immaturity, impetuosity, and also negative family and home environments. These violent crimes can be defined as murder, rape, armed robbery, aggravated assault and the like depending on state law. With these monstrous acts in mind the supreme court justices argument could be proven otherwise through capability and accountability, the underdevelopment of the teenage brain and the severity of the crime. Juveniles commit heinous crimes just like adults
The duty of the law is to punish individuals who break the law as well as seek justice for the victims who experience the crime. Those responsible in one way or another are accountable for their actions. The accountability represents a variety of outcomes such as mandatory treatment programs, payment of fines, community service, and incarceration. However, there tends to be a fine line between the management of adults in comparison to juveniles regarding sentencing laws. Therefore, when a juvenile commits a serious crime there is hesitation on whether or not to try them as an adult in court.
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.
Most humans tend to live by example and studies prove that our behavior is learned, but how do we explain the bad behavior of those that have good parents that are excellent role models? Some people would say that the parents are too flexible and the kids take advantage of them, on the other hand when parents neglect the kids and are bad role models for their kids we easily find the answer to the problem. As a society we contradict ourselves; sometimes we tell parents to not be too flexible with our kids but at the same time we do not want parents to discipline their children too harshly. The question of why juveniles commit crimes does not have an exact answer. Some juveniles commit crimes because of peer pressure, anger over life, and others might just do it for fun.
...why youth engage in criminal activity Research suggests delinquent peers are a proximate cause than family/parental; family/parental may only be a slight cause of involvement in crime. Some research suggests that criminal propensities can be inherited through genes. Unfortunately, the media portrayals of crime aren’t a true representative of the actual crime trends, or accurately reflecting the level of crime perpetrated by youth. There are many different variables that could cause youth to engage in criminal activity, some of these major variables have been discussed throughout this essay.
Solutions to Juvenile Crime Crime is a plague that has haunted American citizens for centuries. The severity of crime has ranged from running a red light to cold blooded murder. Statistics indicate that crime rates have been on the rise in the past decade, especially in juvenile crime. Statistics show that, ‘the number of youths aged 14 and younger who have been charged with homicide has jumped by 43 percent in the past twenty years’ (Kids With No Hope, No Fear, No Rules, And No Life, 2).
As a parent, I have spent a great deal of time observing the behavior, motivation, and thought processes of my children. As they mature these processes have changed, and it has been fascinating to watch. I have learned a great deal on the limits of self control in the adolescent mind during this time, and I believe that families should be held responsible for crimes committed by their teenagers.