More handpicked essays just for you.
Consequences of Juvenile Punishments
Relationship between race, age and crime
American juvenile justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Consequences of Juvenile Punishments
You know how you here these stories about kids committing heinous crimes. Has that happened in your state? It hasn’t happened in my state before. Do you think these kids would really do these things? I believe that some of these kids do know what they are doing, because you shouldn’t commit crimes if you don’t know what the time is in jail. This essay is based on why a kid should be tried as an adult. Whenever I think about a kid being tried as an adult, to me it depends on how bad the crime is and if the kid knows what they were doing. If the state as a law in the kid being tried as an adult already then you can’t do anything about it. If the kid committed murder then they should investigate the crime scene. They should investigate to find
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
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
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
Every year, children as young as thirteen and fourteen are sentenced to die in prison in the United States. Judges rule these sentences without considering factors such as age and life circumstances. According to studies, there are about 2000 children serving juvenile sentences in the United States (Nellis 30). Further, Studies indicated that 25 percent of the young individuals serving life without parole were convicted accomplice liability, meaning they may not have committed the crime or may not know the primary perpetrators of the crime (Steinberg and Scott 54). All this happens despite the global consensus that children should not handle the same way as adults. This paper explores juvenile life sentencing as a social issue that is affecting
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.
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.
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?"
once the minor has committed a violent crime, they are no longer a kid. The minor had the ability to know right from wrong, but he still chose to commit the heinous crime anyway. Choosing to commit this violent crime means that the minor chose to act as an adult and must be held accountable. Once the minor has made the decision to act as an adult, they must be treated as an adult. If we do not teach minors that what they did has consequences they will never learn. Arguments can be made that minors should not be treated as adults and while these arguments do have merit, they are not my beliefs. In my opinion, minors who commit violent crimes need to be tried as adults. Justice does not discriminate when it comes to age. Right is right, and wrong is wrong and the wrong should be punished equally.
In my opinion, I do feel that juveniles should be tried as an adult depending on the crime. I feel if a child decides to make a huge life changing decision they should have to suffer the consequences. If their crime is something little and they don't have a criminal background, then no I don't think they should be.
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.
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.
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.
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.”