Approximately 2,500 children who are under the age of 18 are sentenced to life every year. Most have committed crimes like murder, robbery, armed robbery, and other heinous acts. However, people want to justify their actions just because they don’t know better or their brains are underdeveloped compared to that of an adult. That’s not correct, but true. The state, judges, and jurors should hold kids who commit heinous acts accountable for their actions. In school, kids are taught what’s right and what’s wrong, so they should have some understanding of what they should and shouldn’t do. This is why they should be held accountable for their actions because no matter what, kids are told to do what’s right, either from teachers, news, parents, …show more content…
How is society supposed to be accepting of someone who either caused a bombing, school shooting, or even a local tragedy back into society like nothing happened? Definitely not, they deserve the book thrown at them for what they did and should be held accountable. Not only for the safety of society, but also for the justice of the victim’s family. For instance, the sister of Bonnie Ousley opposed the letter sent to her by the court, petitioning for a modification of Greg’s sentencing. She denied the petition because as she had commented to other officers, “she had lost the only family she had left” (Anderson 15). How could someone let the person who killed your loved one or someone else loved one be set free and roam the earth freely without any repercussions? The Supreme Court only took into account the feelings of the juveniles and not how the victims' families would feel. Which isn’t okay whatsoever, they need to take into account both people. Mostly the feelings of the victim's family. For instance, in the documentary about Kenneth Young, the directors interviewed the victims of Young’s crime. Which is important because it gives the viewer a different perspective of the …show more content…
Furthermore, teenagers should be treated as adults as they are self-aware of their actions. An accurate example of this is Greg Ousley. He killed his parents, planned it out step by step and even set a time/date as to when he would commit his heinous act. When Anderson went to interview Greg, he confessed to Anderson how after committing his crime he went to his neighbors and told them, “My mother’s been killed, someone’s killed my parents” (Anderson 14). Greg knew he had committed an awful crime and tried covering it up by saying that someone else had killed his parents when he returned from his friend’s house. This demonstrates how teenagers do have some sort of awareness of what they are doing and the difference between right and wrong. This is why judges and jurors should try adolescents as adults. However, before society judges teens on their actions, they also have to take into account different types of factors that cause them to act the way they do. For instance, in Paul Thompson’s article, he goes on to discover why teenagers act the way they
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 central idea of this article is to show the two sides of the prompt ¨should Juveniles be tried as adults?¨ This article uses a lot of stories to help back herself up in her answer. The authority with the author/creator is trustworthy because, Jessica Reaves works for a trustworthy place ¨Time¨ The difficult part of trusting the accuracy of the article is, it was published in 2001 which could have a lot of changes in roughly 15 or 16 years. The article uses examples of juvenile violence to prove the point that kids are treated differently from adults. Readers can use this article to prove that kids are incapable of understanding the consequences of their action.
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
Unfortunately, these two cases are not uncommon in the justice world. As a matter of fact, “by 2010, Florida had sentenced more than a hundred children to life imprisonment without parole for non-homicide offenses,” (Stevenson 153). One of the primary reasons for this originated in the idea that harsher punishments will act as a deterrent for kids who want to break the law. However, recent studies have suggested that because the prefrontal lobe of the brain is still in development until the age of twenty, children don’t have the mental capacity to make the best decisions, especially under stress. Additionally, children normally wouldn’t have access to weapons or drugs, which allows the argument that adults should be held responsible for making such objects available to them in the first place (Reaves).
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.
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
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.
For example, a 12 year old kid, Lionel Tate, beat and killed a 6 year old girl to death because he was imitating professional wrestlers he saw on TV. Life in prison without parole or even going to an adult prison is extreme for a 12 year old. Many kids who make it out of the adult system end up worse than when they went in because they come out as hardened criminals. In another case, Nathaniel Brazill, who shot and killed his teacher at the age of 13. The crime was heinous, but the issue with convicting teenagers as adults is that during the teenage years, gray matter in the brain which supports all our thinking and emotions is purged at a rate of 1 to 2 percent a year. This occurs in the frontal lobe of our brain, which controls impulses, risk-taking, and self-control. Teenagers brains work differently and are not yet fully functioning compared to adult brains, evidence enough juveniles should not be tried as adults. However many prosecutors and the families of victims claim that teenagers know it is wrong to kill and the courts need to crack down on these cases in order to send a message to teenegaers across the US to not commit murder, or they could face life without parole. That may be true however, giving kids the message that they are not curable or worthy of a second chance sends out the wrong message and makes other countries in the world look down on the US. Also, they claim that many teenagers commit “thrill kills”, and nothing is wrong with them mentally. They also state that if brain development was the reason, that kids should kill at the same rate as adults. Their main argument is that the murders leave families in ruins and forever scar them when they lose a loved one. Once again many of these arguments are true, but kids are less mature and more vulnerable to peer pressure because their characters are still forming. Children
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.
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.
Juveniles are more than just kids. They are capable of doing anything an adult is capable of doing. One has probably heard the saying, “If you want to be treated like an adult, then act like an adult.” If they’re going to do crimes that “only” adults are capable of doing, then they should treated like an adult and be tried and sentenced like one. Imagine being close to a murder victim, wouldn’t you want them to feel hell? “How would you feel if you never got to see your child alive again while their killer served only a short sentence before being released from jail?” (hchs1259). This quote hits hard. One can only imagine being in the position of a parent whose child was murdered.
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
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.
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.
Youth are unable to make certain decisions for themselves, nevertheless they can be held responsible, when charged with criminal activity, to adult standards. Parental neglect, poverty, no self worth and low self esteem increases a young individuals risk factor for criminal behavior. Although teenagers are commonly identified as young adults, they have yet to acquire the experience of the different aspects of life.(from book) How is the young population expected to do something successfully, if the necessary skills are not present? Children and teens are too incompetent to be tried to the standards of an adult.