The question of at what age a juvenile should be held criminally responsible for their actions, especially in cases of heinous crimes, has sparked a keen debate between legal experts and society. This has been an issue in our country for years because there are people who believe it is wrong to send a juvenile to prison for life without parole, but on the other hand, some people believe that it is right to put juveniles who commit heinous crimes behind bars for life. When it comes to the juvenile criminal system, the goal is to help children who find themselves getting into trouble to get back on track to be good citizens. Meanwhile, when it comes to the adult criminal system, the goal is to punish those who have committed crimes for their …show more content…
But if juveniles are sent to adult facilities, most of the time, it means that there is no hope for the juvenile to change and deserve the sentence the court gives them. States all around the United States have an age at which juveniles can be held accountable for their actions. 18 is the age when children become young adults and enter the real world where their actions have real-world consequences so people cannot get away with actions that may have been acceptable as juveniles. Changes need to be made because children are always taught right from wrong whether it is from parents or schools and at young ages these children have always been taught to think before acting out because based on what these children do there is a possibility that consequences can be waiting on the other side of these actions. Society believes that it is wrong because at the end of the day, they are children and their brains are not fully developed, so the juveniles that are committing these crimes are not able to comprehend the damage that is being
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
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.
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
Every year, children as young as thirteen and fourteen are sentenced to die in prison in the United States. Judges rule these sentences without considering factors such as age and life circumstances. According to studies, there are about 2000 children serving juvenile sentences in the United States (Nellis 30). Further, Studies indicated that 25 percent of the young individuals serving life without parole were convicted accomplice liability, meaning they may not have committed the crime or may not know the primary perpetrators of the crime (Steinberg and Scott 54). All this happens despite the global consensus that children should not handle the same way as adults. This paper explores juvenile life sentencing as a social issue that is affecting
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.
Kids should be subjected to the measures of punishment that our judicial system is giving to them. Kids who show lots of enmity should be tried as adults. It is the only way to protect the innocent children. These kids know right from wrong, but they choose to do the wrong things and violence is wrong. As the laws have gotten stricter on discipline the kids have gotten wilder. When we let society tell us how to discipline our children then violent children is the result.
Although some would argue that juveniles undergo a series of brain development in which they lose brain cells that control their impulses, risk taking, and self-control (Thompson 46). However this lost during development does not excuse juvenile from their accountability, instead they should acquire special attention, proper nurturing and guidance during development in order to help them make better decisions. Thus teenagers accused of violent crimes should be tried and sentenced justly, regardless of age, to ensure the law's equality and educate juveniles regarding the potential severity of their actions' consequences. That is how we'll be able prevent future acts of violence and crimes from occurring in society.
developing mentally and emotionally. This can lead to poor decision-making and impulsive behavior. Additionally, studies have shown that juveniles are more likely to be influenced by peer pressure and external factors, which can lead to criminal behavior. Therefore, it is important to consider the age and developmental stage of the offender when determining the appropriate punishment. Instead of the death penalty, alternative forms of punishment such as rehabilitation and counseling should be considered for juvenile offenders.
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
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).
"Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time." -- David Grusin and Morgan Ames
The controversy of juveniles being tried as adults has plagued the U.S. for years now. If kids do not have the same rights as adults do and aren’t allowed to vote, drink alcohol, smoke, or drive until a certain age, is it acceptable for them to receive the same punishments as adults? It is questions like these that have caused endless debates to erupt in courtrooms. Locking minors in prisons may get them off the streets and reduce overall criminal activity, but there are issues of morality affecting people’s judgments. When people consider teens’ underdeveloped brains and emotionality, the pros and cons of being sentenced as adults, and the process of being tried, perspectives tend to change toward juvenile defendants. This practice of trying minors as adults is one Americans need to face and resolve in
The Han Empire in China and the Roman Empire in the Mediterranean Basin were among the greatest empires back then. The two empires managed to rule in the first century of Common Era. The Han Empire started around 200 C.E. and the Roman empire around 400 C.E. Both empires exhibited great military power, part of an economic trade and their territories had a wide range of land. Since they had these wonderful qualities to rule an empire, how did they still manage to have an adverse collapse? Although there may be a similar reason for why their empire took a downfall, there are also several different reasons for the decline in the economy, effects of changing populations and failure of political systems.
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.