Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Consequences of crime on criminals
Consequences of crime on criminals
Consequences of crime on criminals
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Consequences of crime on criminals
In today's society, personal responsibilities are held accountable only through explicit knowledge of an action's consequences. Without consequences, no individual can be held liable for his or her actions. As teenagers commit increasingly egregious crimes, the media shifts attention away from the actions of these teenagers and focuses on the seemingly severe punishments they are entitled to. Teenagers accused of violent crimes should be tried and sentenced justly, regardless of age, to ensure the law's equality before its citizens, to educate juveniles regarding the potential severity of their actions' consequences, and to prevent future acts of offense from occurring in society. One of the reasons why juveniles should be tried as adults is to ensure equality of the law before citizens. In order to promote this concept, Californian Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Conner once blindfolded herself before a civil case. When O' Conner was asked to explain her action, she replied that the law is blind before its citizens. According to Liptak, Justice Antonin Scalia explained that "the drop in juvenile death sentences was proof that juries could be trusted to sort and weight evidence about the defenders youth and culpabilities" (Liptak 42). When our founding father established this great nation, they had in mind the principle of equality before the law, regardless of social class, wealth, or even age. The same judiciary spirit should be applied equally to the juveniles. Like adults, juveniles are tried before a jury who weighs and evaluates the facts and evidence presented at the case to issued the appropriate verdict for the crimes committed. Thus, severe consequences such as the death penalty are rarely imposed and only assigned ... ... middle of paper ... ...he jury to believe that his continual existence would threaten society, thus the jury had to punishment him to prevent future offenses from happening. 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.
Within the last five years, violent offenses by children have increased 68 percent, crimes such as: murder, rape, assault, and robbery. Honestly, with these figures, it is not surprising at all that the Juveniles Courts focus less on the children in danger, and focus more on dangerous children. This in fact is most likely the underlying reasoning behind juveniles being tried as adults by imposing harsher and stiffer sentences. However, these policies fail to recognize the developmental differences between young people and
Thus, the shifting perceptions of the justice system has transformed what it means to be a child and an adult due to their pervasive, and punitive approaches to crime and delinquency. Although adolescents today enjoy many new freedoms and greater time to experiment, those that don’t conform to “normative behaviors” and engage in socially constructed definitions of delinquency, often end up under the firm hands of the juvenile justice system. Despite the creation of this phase in an adolescent’s life, the injustices within the adult justice system have breached into the juvenile system, thus, blurring the lines of what it means to be an adolescent in modern times. Thereby, the adolescent stage is constantly being manipulated to conform and match the social construction of crime and delinquency, and the rise in the practice of trying juveniles as adults within the court system and mandating life sentences is evidence of this
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
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
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While California's juvenile population rose by a half a million since the middle and late 1970's, juveniles made up less than fifth-teen percent of California's felony arrests in 1998, compared to thirty percent in 1978; according to the Justice Policy Institute. The juvenile arrests have dropped back, even as the population of kids between ages of ten and eight-teen has continued to grow, and the number of kids confined in the California Youth Authority (CYA) has fallen. With all the progress our society has made in cutting back in juvenile crimes there is still a very serious problem. But if locking kids up is the best way to address it, how do we explain a drop in crime when there are more teens in California and fewer in custody? First we must look at the economy around us. With so many job opportunities available more and more teenagers find honest ways to keep busy and make money. Our generation has a brighter future than the generation a decade ago. Next we look at successful crime prevention efforts: after-school programs, mentoring, teen outreach programs, truancy abatement, anti-gang programs, family resource centers. There is evidence that these programs are beginning to pay off. Sending more, and younger teens through the adult court system has been a trend across the country in reaction to crimes, such as school shootings and violent rapes. Yet evidence shows that treating youth as adults does not reduce crime. In Florida, where probability wise more kids are tried as adults then in any other state, studies found that youth sent through the adult court system are twice as likely to commit more crimes when they're release...
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.
The historical development of the juvenile justice system in the United States is one that is focused on forming and separating trying juveniles from adult counterparts. One of the most important aspects is focusing on ensuring that there is a level of fairness and equality with respect to the cognitive abilities and processes of juvenile as it relates to committing crime. Some of the most important case legislation that would strengthen the argument in regard to the development of the juvenile justice system is related to the reform of the justice system during the turn of the 19th century. Many juveniles were unfortunately caught in the crosshairs of being tried as adults and ultimately receiving punishments not in line with their ability
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).
Harassment, reckless endangerment, and burglary are all juvenile offenses. These juvenile offenses almost always stay on the juvenile’s criminal record, and the offenses displayed on a juvenile’s criminal record may cause employers, educators, and other authority figures to think less of the juvenile offender. As a viewer can see, this one mistake or lapse in judgment can ruin the juvenile offenders chance to further their success in life. For example, juvenile offenders may not obtain the dream job that they have always wanted, get into the college that they have always wanted to, or be eligible for a scholarship whether athletic or academic. However, there is a loophole in the juvenile justice system called teen courts. Teen courts give first-time offenders and some re-offenders a second chance because the offense (s) do not go on their criminal record, and their peers get to decide what sanctions the juvenile offender receives or performs. The big question that I am going to discuss throughout this essay is do juvenile offenders who appear before teen courts recidivate?
As minors commit violent crimes without being held accountable, they can grow up to be real criminals and they can be very dangerous. Without a solid foundation of what is right and wrong, these minors will grow up believing that their actions are the norm. For this reason, minors need to be held accountable. They need to be taught that they cannot get away with their crimes. In 2007, courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled an estimated 1.7 million delinquency cases. Delinquency cases include vandalism, shoplifting, robbery, and murder. These are just some of the crimes minors can commit. This was up by forty-four percent from 1985. If a minor grows up believing that crime is acceptable, they will repeat the pattern. Without interrupting the pattern and making them accountable, these minors will always have a twisted sense of right and wrong. A sense of what is right and wrong is important and can be learned at any age. Minors learn very young, what...
There is a great deal of controversy over the trying and sentencing of juvenile offenders today. Many will argue that because the severity of Juvenile crimes has risen, the severity of its consequences should rise; however, no matter how serious the crime is, juvenile offenders tried as adults receive far worse than they deserve. The majority of Juveniles tried as adults are hardly given any form of human rights. Adult jails are not the environment children should have to experience, especially those sentenced for misdemeanors and nonviolent crimes. There are other solutions to reducing juvenile crime. It does not take adult court to straighten out kids on the wrong path. Most children are not even able to recognize that what they had done is wrong. There may be no perfect solution to reducing juvenile crime, but there are ways far more effective than adult trying and sentencing.
This paper describes the various legislations and movements that were established in 19th century to address the issue of juvenile justice system. It outlines the challenges faced by the legislation and movements and their implications in addressing the issues of the juvenile justice system.
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.
“Their brains that are responsible for thoughts, actions, and emotion are not fully develop.” (Garinger 93) Juvenile’s brain could not control all of their thoughts, actions, and emotion in their head in order to prevent them from committing crimes. They do not deserve to be tried as adult when they are making bad decision on their lives by committing a crime. “Juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders: they are less mature, more vulnerable to peer pressure, cannot escape from dangerous environments, and their characters are still in formation.” (Garinger 93)
The first article; “Adult Crime; Adult Time.” by Linda J. Collier is about how the juvenile delinquents of the world should be thrown right in with the hardened criminals. She talks about the Jonesboro, Arkansas incident in which 11-year-old Andrew Golden and 13-year-old Mitchell Johnson, slaughtered their classmates as they ran from the school building. They pulled the fire alarm and began their assault with a barrage of bullets. In this particular situation, “they are still regarded by the law as children first and criminals second.”(Pg. 620). This has not been the first time that young children have committed such crimes, but the average of violence committed by children has risen by 60% since 1984. She claims that because of these statistics, we need to update the juvenile justice system. “In recent years many states have enacted changes in their juvenile crime laws and some have lowered the age at which a juvenile can be tried as an adult for certain violent crimes.” (Pg. 620) According to this author, she feels that it is a start in the right direction. She claims that she has represented children as a court appointed guardian and is humbled trying to help children out of their difficulties which often due to circumstances beyond their control. Still, for violent crimes, she feels that “children who knowingly engage in adult conduct and crimes should automatically be subject to adult rules and adult prison time.”