Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Consequences of Juvenile Punishments
Impact of media on youth
Impact of media on youth
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Being eighteen years of age is when one is officially and legally regarded as an adult. As an adult, one is deemed to incorporate the capacity to appreciate certain rights that every individual is given alongside the necessity to fulfill certain obligations. At this age, individuals gain privileges, such as the ability to purchase tobacco products, voting rights, purchase fireworks and get tattoos. However, although being of age sounds great, there is one privilege that many do not desire to ever attain, the ability to be held responsible for your own actions. In the year 2012, the Supreme Court made the decision to ban mandatory life imprisonment without parole for juveniles. Nevertheless, their decision was utterly unacceptable. Because of this new rule, jurists, prosecutors, lawyers and just about any adult, forcibly must be lenient towards juveniles who cannot be justified when they commit atrocious crimes. …show more content…
However, the concept that the Supreme Court made the wrong decision to ban life sentences on juveniles can be proven.
In the essays “On Punishment and Teen Killers” by Jennifer Jenkins and “Some Juvenile Killers Deserve Adult Justice” by Peter A. Weir, it is demonstrated that juveniles use excuses to minimize their punishment. In the essays “Startling Finds On Teenage Brains” by Paul Thompson and “Juveniles Should Be Tried as Adults in Certain Circumstances” by Mary Onelia Estudillo, it is expressed that juvenile delinquents should be held responsible for their
wrong-doings. In the essays “Retrial in Gay Teen Killing Poses Challenges” by Catherine Saillant and Richard Winton and “Adult Punishments for Juveniles” by Charles D. Stimson, it is indicated that some juveniles deserve to go through the adult justice system. Based on an analysis of strong textual evidence and the conducted research, it is clear that the minority of Supreme Court justices were correct in their efforts to keep mandatory life sentences for juvenile murders intact because one’s age shouldn’t be an excuse, every criminal should be held accountable and some crimes are just too horrific for the juvenile justice system to address.
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.
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
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.
According to criminal.findlaw.com the definition of the juvenile justice system is the area of criminal law applicable to people not old enough to be held responsible for criminal acts. Juveniles are people 17 and under. Juveniles should be convicted as adults for violent crimes like assault or murder etcetera because if they can commit an adult crime they should get an adult punishment. Also if juveniles don’t get punished for their crimes then they’ll keep doing it because they got off unpunished the first time.
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.
Juvenile Justice Juvenile justice is the decision whether or not to charge a juvenile as an adult. When a juvenile is charged as an adult, they are sentenced to long prison terms and sometimes life. In 2012 two groups of judges came together, one group believes that Juveniles should be allowed to be sentenced to life in prison and the other group believes that Juveniles should not be allowed to be sentenced to life in prison. I agree with the group of judges that believe that juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison. Age is a factor in why juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison.
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?"
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.
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. Juveniles are not mature enough or developed psychologically, and, therefore, do not consider the consequences of their actions. In the article, “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Thompson, the writer argues that juveniles are not adults. Their brains develop at different stages and they learn skills that they need to learn at a certain time.
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.
To this day, juvenile justice is among the most controversial disputes throughout society; mainly because if an adolescent decides to the make the senseless decision of committing a vicious crime, and in result causes the death of an innocent person, brings the question whether or not to prosecute the juvenile as an adult. This question is at the center of the debate in regards to juvenile justice systems. According to the New York Times, There have been twenty-three states that prolonged the reach of their juvenile justice systems and passed laws that restrict the practice of automatically trying and punishing young offenders as adults, or keeping them from being placed in adult penitentiaries, since 2005 (Schwartz 1). Indicating that perhaps incarceration without any rehabilitation is an ineffective sentencing to a juvenile delinquent.
Imagine being the only teenager in a room full of murders. Nearly 3,000 teenagers nationwide have been sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole (CHILDREN IN PRISON). A child's life should not be thrown away just because they committed a mistake they were not fully aware of. When a minor commits a crime justice is not being severed. Their actions are not the same as adults. Teenagers do not get the same benefits as adults so why would they be tried as an adult. Juveniles should not be tried as adults because their brains are not fully developed so they are not fully aware of what they are doing.
In today’s generation there are many children and teens that commit crimes to satisfy their self being. Every day we see in the news about the reasons why children or teens commit crimes like murder or homicide. Sentencing juveniles to life in prison is not a right response to prevent homicide and serious murder, because their brains are not fully develop and the bad environment they live in. Teenagers or children need to be remain unformed of preventing crimes in today’s society. With this said, juvenile’s mental brains, backgrounds and growth are the reasons why they are not proficient to maintain themselves in a prison cell.