Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of youth crime on society
Controversy over the death penalty
Legal system of juveniles
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of youth crime on society
There has been a large controversy debating whether teen killers should be sentenced to life in prison or given a chance to petition for parole. This is a complicated issue, but from what I have read and annotated, juveniles deserve the right to petition for parole depending on the situation, their mindset, and the setting they’ve been raised in. Justice Elena Kagan argues that life without parole for a juvenile overlooks their age and the environment they’ve been hopelessly influenced by. However, Justice Alito disputes that no matter what major crime a juvenile has commited they deserve the right to at least fight to be [released into society.] I agree with Kagan more than I do with Alito and I’ll tell you why. First, when major crimes such as murders, school shootings, or bombings …show more content…
This was the case for writer Jennifer Jenkins sister, as written in her article On Punishment and Teen Killers. Jenkins sister was shot by a teenager in 1990 suburban Chicago, her killer just wanted “to see what it would feel like to shoot someone.” This juvenile refrained from apologizing for his actions; in this situation I believe the court has every right sentence him to life without parole. If he was not caught sooner he would have commited another major crime. Jenkins expounds “But he got a rush out of breaking the law and ultimately started work on his other plan for mass murder at a local bank. Bragging to his friends led to his arrest.” This killer felt no remorse for what he had done and was proud of his actions. People like this should be [set apart from innocent people,] as said by James Q. Wilson, Harvard Professor and Crime Expert. In this situation Justice Alito is in the wrong, why should this juvenile have a right to fight for his innocence if he doesn’t even believe he is himself:
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.
Most people don 't look at every aspect of a crime. They don 't think about everyone that was affected, other than the victim. In her article "On Punishment and Teen Killers", Jennifer Jenkins explains how her younger sister was taken from her by a murderer who shot and killed her. In her article she states, "So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never recover." Jenkins is explaining her personal experience of losing her younger sister to help others understand what the families of the victim have to deal with for the rest of their lives. She brings a point of view that most people have never been in because they 've never experienced what it 's like to have a loved one taken away from you by murder. In her story she also states, "If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world." Many people believe that the supreme court needs to be more lenient on juveniles because their brain is not fully developed as that of an adult, but brain development cannot be used as an excuse because as Jenkins explains, the teens would be killing at the same rate all over the world. Jenkins also brings up a good point about how the US as a whole needs to step up to prevent these crimes from happening. Jenkins states, "We in America have to own to this particular problem, with weapons so easily available to our youth, and the violence-loving culture we raise them. She is trying to bring awareness to society that America is also at fault for these crimes. Furthermore, she also explains why life sentencing is not as cruel as some may feel it is when she says, "… a life sentencing still allows a great deal of good living to be done, even from behind bars, far more than these teen killers gave to our murdered love
“You are hereby sentenced to life without the possibility of parole”. These are the words that a juvenile in America is likely to hear. Collectively, as a nation, the United States has incarcerated more juveniles with life sentences than any other nation. With this fact the arguments arise that juveniles should not be punished the same was as an adult would be but, is that really how the justice system should work? To allow a juvenile who recently robbed a store only get a slap on the wrist? Not comprehending that there are consequences for their actions and how what they have done affects the victims.
Even though juveniles brains’ aren't developed at the age they committed the crime, they should be able to differentiate between what is right and what is wrong. However, four justices strongly agree, mandatory sentences reflected the will of America society that heinous crimes committed by juveniles should always be punished. The majority of Supreme Court justices who argued to abolish mandatory life in prison for juveniles. Researchers around the world agree with this statement because juveniles don't have a fully developed brain or have rough homes. Many juveniles have don't first degree misers and second degree murders. I stand against abolishing mandatory life in prison. In my opinion Juveniles, depending on the the crime should be sentenced
y of their actions.To demonstrate this assertion is correct, sufficient research has been complied.To prove in the article, On Punishment and Teen Killers, by Jennifer Jenkins has stated that,”We in America have to own this particular problem, with weapons so easily available to our youth, and the violence-loving culture in which we raise them”(5).Although it 's not us who commit the crime we do make it easier for them to get a hold on weapons espicially in the Unites States.Adam Liptak points out in the article, Jailed for Life After Crimes as Teenagers, that “The United States is one of only a handful of countries that does that.Life without parole, the most severe form of life sentences,is theoretically available for
Throughout and for many years there has been a lot of controversy on how to trial someone who has committed a crime under the age of 18. A lie will be a lie even if it 's serious or innocent and that 's why just like a crime will always be a crime, no matter what the situation is. The age of a person who has committed murder shouldn 't be an issue or a complication. Many advocate that the juvenile is just a child, but despised that I believe that is no justification or defense for anyone who does a crime. America and the nation need to apprehend that juveniles that are being conducted to life in prison is not just for one small incident or crime, but for several severe crimes according to Jennifer Jenkins, Juvenile Justice Information
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.
Day after day in this country there is a debate going on about the death penalty and whether we as people have the right to decide the fate of another persons life. When we examine this issue we usually consider those we are arguing about to be older men and women who are more than likely hardened criminals with rap sheets longer than the height we stand (Farley & Willwerth, 1998). They have made a career of crime, committing it rather than studying it, and somewhere along the line a jury of their peers decided enough was enough. They were handed down the most severe and most final punishment of them all, death. Behind all of the controversy that this issue raises lies a different group of people that are not so often brought into the lime light, juveniles.
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.
First off sentencing juveniles without parole should not be allowed to happen because the juveniles brain has not yet matured enough and they don’t think before they act. In the article “Juveniles don’t deserve life sentences” by Gail Garinger he asserts “young people are biologically different from adults. Brain imagining studies reveal that regions of
Is it fair to give juveniles life sentences? On June 25 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, stated that “Mandatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age and its hallmark features- among them, immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate the risks and consequences. It prevents taking into account the family and home environment that surrounds him and from which he cannot usually extricate himself no matter how brutal or dysfunctional.” Juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison or adult jail until legal age. Due to the facts that many are still young and aren’t over eighteen.
Age is a factor in why Juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison. As Paul Thompson states in his article Startling Finds on Teenage Brains from the Sacramento Bee, published on May 25, 2001 “ ...These frontal lobes,which inhibit our violent passions, rash action and regulate our emotions are vastly immature throughout the teenage years.” he also says that “The loss[of brain tissue] was like a wildfire, and you see it in every teenager.”. This loss of brain tissue plays a role in the erratic behavior of teens, they cannot properly assess their emotions and thoughts. During this period of brain tissue loss teens are unpredictable, adults do not know what their teen’s next move will be, teens themselves do not even know what their next move will be. As we grow our brains develop, therefore teen brains are not fully developed, so they cannot be held to the same standards as adults.
Should juveniles be trial as an adult after committing a heinous crime and sentenced to life? As a teenager, this question if far complicated to answer due that I am a teenager yet in my opinion, I believe that the juvenile should not be sentenced to life. I believe that there 's other way to punish them for their crimes. The last execution was in 2006 in California. On June 2012, the supreme court of justice ruled that juveniles cannot be sentenced to life in prison. On July 2014, in California the death penalty was removed. The 8th amendment banned the use of cruel or punishments. The reason why this rule have been imposed or banned was because many believed that they deserve a second chance. There are many reasons why juveniles commit crimes such as murder.
If he had, he would have been placed in prison and never would have had any chance of rehabilitation. I do not believe that anyone that young, regardless of the crime, (well unless the child has killed more than one person, maybe then, but that is a completely different argument) should be tried as an adult. There is a juvenile court system for a reason, juveniles get charged accordingly and I believe that it is fair. Within a juvenile court Jordan would be given the opportunity of treatment all while still being punished for his heinous crime. That is why I believe that the later ruling for him to be placed within a residential treatment facility until the age of 21, was a far better punishment. This punishment will ensure that Jordan gets the help that he needs and that he will be held responsible for his