Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Legal system of juveniles
Effects of teenage crime
Legal system of juveniles
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Legal system of juveniles
Suppose you’re at the mall with your friends and you see a boy from school running out of an expensive store, and the next day you see him on the tv for burglary and second-degree murder. This young man had a bright future ahead of him like many other teenagers or children, before they unintentionally murder someone and have been convicted for something they probably didn’t even thoroughly think about, and later imprisoned. It is simply the impulsive, erratic behavior teenagers have in their teenage years caused by the significant amount of tissue loss that led the teenager to make homicidal decisions. In the United States, teenagers can be tried as adults, go to prison for possibly the rest of their life and the youngest a child can be arrested …show more content…
An adult is someone who is as young as 21 and does not necessarily need to be taken care of by their parents unless they might have a disability they are not able to control. We shouldn’t identify teenagers as adults just because they probably made a decision without a second thought to killing someone, or maybe it was an accident. Being identified as an adult when you’re only a teenager could be a disadvantage although a majority of the teenagers want to be treated like an adult. It is giving the court the chance to put you in prison instead of juvie because of the crime. Teenagers unlike adults haven’t had a fully developed brain and have suffered massive loss of tissue and so they make very impetuous decisions. Something similar happened to Nathan Brazill when he shot his favorite English teacher. He was scolded for throwing water balloons out the window and later convicted for first-degree murder. We have mistaken a teenager for what might be a burglar, and confuse our conscience with what we see in front of our faces, for example, the cover of a book. And then fear that they might cause more harm if we let them off the hook, believing that the teenager will learn their lesson if they stay inside a prison cell for a couple of years. It seems like the more trouble teenagers cause the more determined we are to send them away. A quote from the article Kids are Kids-Until They …show more content…
Teenagers, unlike all the other age groups, are easily influenced by anything that comes their way because, during the teenage years, they find their inner-selves and want to discover new pathways to determine their future. Friends although not in prison can also be a bad influence depending on who they hang out with. Perhaps, a certain teenager lived an unstable life with no father, things just started falling down from there, friends did illegal drugs, you find that it is okay since they are doing it since nobody is there to stop you. Due to curiosity even though it may seem bad you do it anyways because that is the only thing you are exposed to, which is the same concept as playing the same video game as your other friends play. The same thing happens inside a prison cell and once you let those aged teenagers out, they’ll cause more harm than before without knowing. I believe we sometimes confuse the word helping in all sorts of different cases. In this case, we confuse it by charging teenagers as adults and putting them in prison cells to “help” them learn their lesson, people might be afraid they will cause more harm if they are let off the hook, or giving closure to the family members of the person that has passed.
Many people say that the systems first priority should be to protect the public from the juvenile criminals that are a danger to others. Once the juveniles enter the system there is however, arguments on what should be done with them. Especially for those deemed too dangerous to be released back to their parents. Some want them locked away for as long as possible without rehabilitation, thinking that it will halt their criminal actions. One way to do this they argue would be to send them into an adult court. This has been a large way to reform the juvenile system, by lowering the age limits. I believe in certain cases this is the best method for unforgiving juveniles convicted of murder, as in the case of Ronald Duncan, who got away with a much lesser sentence due to his age. However another juvenile, Geri Vance, was old enough to be sent into the adult court, which caused him t...
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.
If a family member was murdered, a family member was murdered, age should not dictate if the punishment for homicide will be more lenient or not. If anyone not just juveniles has the capabilities to take someone's life and does so knowing the repercussions, they should be convicted as an adult. In the case of Jennifer Bishop Jenkins who lost her sister, the husband and their unborn child, is a strong advocate of juveniles being sentenced to life without parole. In her article “Jennifer Bishop Jenkins On Punishment and Teen Killers” she shows the world the other side of the spectrum, how it is to be the victim of a juvenile in a changing society where people are fighting against life sentences for juveniles. As she states in the article “There are no words adequate to describe what this kind of traumatic loss does to a victims family. So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never
For one, unlike Ian he was convicted and found guilty of a non-homicide crime yet still also found himself in a life sentence. For better or for worse, Joe wasn’t confined but “was [instead] repeatedly raped and sexually assaulted,” the trauma from which eventually caused him to develop multiple sclerosis (Stevenson 259). 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, recently 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
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.
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 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
Many people assume that teenagers should not be sentenced as adults, because their brain is not fully developed. On the other hand, people believe if teenagers commit crimes then they need to have consequences for their actions. According to the Campaign for Youth Justices, about 250,000 teenagers are tried, sentenced, or incarcerated as adults every year in the United States (Campaign for Youth Justices 3). Therefore, charging teenagers as adults is fair, because they are human beings just like adults.
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.
A juvenile is defined as “physiologically immature or undeveloped” in the Merriam Webster dictionary. Throughout the years, laws have changed and teenagers who commit crimes are going to be tried as adults. This is a very big issue because many people have different opinions. Juveniles who commit adult crimes should be given a proper sentence based on the level of their crime because of the goals of the criminal justice system and the teen’s level of competency.
Teenagers do not have what we call “adult” rights therefore they should not be sentenced as one. For example in the Article “Kids Are Kids - Until They Commit Crimes” by Marjie Lundstrom she said “It’s a glaring inconsistency that’s getting more glaring by the hour as children as
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.
For instance, juveniles do not deserve life sentences because their brain isn’t fully developed yet and lack awareness of their actions. In the article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Paul Thompson, he explains the development of the brain and how in some situations the brain isn’t ready and it can affect the person. This effect in divergent ways; psychologically and emotionally. Thompson's article introduces the case of Nathaniel Brazill, at age 14, charged with second degree murder, trial as an adult and sentenced to life in prison without parole. After some serious research, it has shown that as many other juveniles who have committed a crime they are “far from adulthood”.