. Introduction
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 supporters of juvenile transfers argue that it will be a deterrent to further criminal behavior. The theory argues that "deterrence
…show more content…
The principle of duty is a primal reason that shows that morality is based on the obligation to do the good act even though a person may not want to. In other words, whether it is society or the legal system the obligation to keep juveniles in their own courts is what is expected as they are fundamentally different than adults. The personal interest of critics or supporters cannot matter, the principle of duty is what presents the greatest happiness for society. Even though the duty is to keep juveniles in juvenile courts and detention facilities a juvenile can be sentenced until the age of eighteen, and then transferred to adult prison to finish a lengthy sentence if need be. It is important to recognize that the goodwill brings out the principle of duty in Kantian ethics. A person's intentions will represent the goodwill regardless of the outcome and this produces the duty. Earlier a discussion on the concept of maxims in regards to morality shows that acceptance is on the basis of a rule or principle, in other words, a universal law. The act is not transferring juveniles to adult court, this is a rule under the assumption of the concept of maxims. Therefore, the universal law is being comfortable in applying that maxim to all juveniles regardless of the
(2010). Juvenile Transfer Laws: An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency (NCJ 220595). Retrieved from website: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/220595.pdf
Redding, R. E. (2010). Juvenile Transfer Laws: An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency? Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Everybody deserves a chance to prove themselves Youths under the age of 18 will be able to avoid arrest or criminal charges if they agree to participate in a “diversion” program that aims to prevent repeat offences. It might help them find a job, beat a drug habit, deal with mental health troubles or bring them face to face with victims to recognize the impact of their crimes. The goal is to reduce recidivism by providing alternatives to custody and overburdened courts, where some youths are more likely to learn about getting lawyers and saying nothing than about remorse and going straight, said Insp. David Saunders, who is overseeing the new program says “Youth got a second chance; they weren’t criminalized,” Saunders said. “The victims were very happy. A lot of people aren’t looking for their pound of flesh by sending people to court. What they really want is for young people to learn. They want them to be remorseful and to understand: Don’t do it again.
When a juvenile is presented in the adult justice system, there is very little options to correct bad behaviors. However, in a juvenile court, there are many options that are available such as house arrest, curfews, community service, counseling, and jail. With these options available and many others, juveniles have a chance to correct poor judgement choices without spending majority of their life in jail. Studies have shown that juveniles who have been tried as adults and been sentenced harsh punishments have a higher chance of committing a crime sooner than those tried in the juvenile system.
In the last 42 years little to no changes have been made to correct the standards that govern punitive measures towards juvenile delinquency. Today juvenile law is governed by state and many states have enacted a juvenile code. However, in numerous cases, juveniles are transferred to adult court when juvenile courts waive or relinquish jurisdiction. Adolescents should not be tried in the adult court system or sentenced to adult penitentiary's on account of: teen brains are not mature which causes a lack of understanding towards the system, incarceration in an adult facility increases juvenile crime, and children that are sentenced to adult prison are vulnerable to abuse and rape.
Thousands of kid criminals in the United States have been tried as adults and sent to prison (Equal Justice Initiative). The debate whether these kids should be tried as adults is a huge controversy. The decision to try them or to not try them as an adult can change their whole life. “Fourteen states have no minimum age for trying children as adults” (Equal Justice Initiative). Some people feel that children are too immature to fully understand the severity of their actions. People who are for kids to be tried as adults feel that if they are old enough to commit the crime, then they are old enough to understand what they are doing. There are people who feel that children should only be tried as adults depending on the crime.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines Probation as a period of time given to someone who commits a crime and instead of being incarcerated are allowed to spend their sentence in the community based on conditions set aside by the courts. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/probation) The task was given to me to build the ultimate model of Probation Services. After careful consideration and great thought this is the route I decided to take. I believe that parents play a great role in some of the decisions their children make. The decisions children make today are a reflection of their parents. My focus on this probation model is to place both child and parent in an institution were they would undergo a period of restoration of family values, rehabilitation, parenting courses, academia and counselling. The ages of these juveniles will range between the ages of ten (10) to seventeen (17) years old.Therefore I stand for institutionalized probation and how this probation will assist in instilling family values.
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...
While this may help adults desist from crime, it may not be as effective in helping juveniles. Most delinquency occurs during young adulthood and then the individual ages out of crime. When looking at juvenile desistance other explanations exist as to why some juveniles continue a life of crime and others desist. One idea places responsibility on the ability to make conscious decisions. A study, by Haigh, of desistance among juveniles and their transitional period to a law abiding life suggest that most juvenile offenders simply make the decision to stop committing crime. Haigh conducted the study using one on one interviews in order to capture the former offender’s interpretation as to why they stopped committing crime. Through the interviews she found that most juveniles held this preconceived idea that they had to commit crime based on where they lived. Crime was a part of a regular daily routine for many. Participants state things such as, “you have to do crime, if you don’t you get stomped on” or “we didn’t think it as dangerous, we got off on the buzz of doing it” (Haigh, 2009). Some did not have reasons as to why they made the decision to stop committing crime. Others stated that they wanted to stop committing crime because of new found relationships, making their parents happy, or from fear of being sent to jail. For this set of juveniles in the study it can be said that as they
In Section One and Section Two of his work. Kant explores his position on his fundamental principle of morality, or his “categorical imperative”, or his idea that all actions are moral and “good” if they are performed as a duty. Such an idea is exemplified when he says, “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant 14). The philosopher uses examples such as suicide and helping others in distress to apply his principal to possible real life situation. Kant is successful in regards to both issues. As a result, it means that categorical imperative can plausibly be understood as the fundamental principle of all morality. Kant’s reasoning for his categorical imperative is written in a way that makes the theory out to be very plausible.
Today?s court system is left with many difficult decisions. One of the most controversial being whether to try juveniles as adults or not. With the number of children in adult prisons and jails rising rapidly, questions are being asked as to why children have been committing such heinous crimes and how will they be stopped. The fact of the matter is that it is not always the children's fault for their poor choices and actions; they are merely a victim of their environment or their parents. Another question asked is how young is too young. Children who are too young to see an R rated film unaccompanied are being sent to adult prisons. The only boundaries that seem to matter when it comes to being an adult are laws that restrain kids from things such as alcohol, pornography, and other materials seen as unethical. Children that are sent to adult prison are going to be subjected to even more unprincipled ideas and scenes. When children can be sent to jail for something as minor as a smash and grab burglary, the judicial system has errors. The laws that send juveniles to adult prisons are inhumane, immoral, and unjust. Kids are often incompetent, which leads to unfair trials. Adult prisons are also very dangerous for minors, and in many cases this leads to more juvenile crimes.
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.
The juvenile system was first established in the United States around 1899 when Illinois had their first court appearance including a juvenile. This then led to the Nation’s first juvenile system being created, which was for youth under the age of eighteen who have been convicted of crimes. Up until then, most youth were tried as an adult until the system was put into place. The system has different sections in which they youth is taken in such as: intake, adjudication, disposition, and post adjudicatory.
Youth justice is a complex concern. There are many different ways to approach it — and just like anything else, everyone believes that their model is the most effective for reducing crime. Q’oranka Kilcher, an American actor once said “[…] it’s important for us as a society to remember that the youth within juvenile justice systems are, most of the time, youths who simply haven 't had the right mentors and supporters around them - because of circumstances beyond their control.” This seems fair. Youth may not be able to control their circumstances, but should they be responsible for their own actions and be punished? Or, should they be supported and encouraged in order to get rehabilitated? Different opinions influence different models. Four
The forgotten few: the juvenile offender population. Seldom thought about, but yet are the foundation and underpinning of the origin of the crime in the United States. This is an inquiry as to what has been done to the adolescents and children with regards to sanctions that have not yet been really brought to light. The problematic history of juvenile offenders is one of the United States dirty little secret. The literature shows the nations children who deviate from the norm are presumed to be deviant and treated like its adult criminal population. Teenagers, kids, adolescents are presumed to be treated as if they are of age. What is lost is the cognitive development and nourishment when such negative actions occur. The basic and fundamental formative academics that have shown effectiveness are not being implemented into the sanctions for these juvenile offenders. There is a linear correlation between low education obtainment levels, mental illness and juvenile offending and recidivism. This is a significant dynamic risk factor that has the potential to eliminate the deviance of the youth in the nation. The development of our youth mentally can indeed have lasting positive effects for sustaining positive results during their rehabilitation stints and most importantly decreasing recidivism.